MozillaZine

Netscape 7.2 Release Set for August 3rd?

Wednesday July 28th, 2004

Slashdot is reporting that AOL will release Netscape 7.2 on August 3rd, citing the shipping date for the CDs as evidence. While this date is probably a good guideline, it is worth noting that past shipping dates for CDs have not always exactly coincided with the dates new releases have been made available for download. Furthermore, the recent Mozilla security holes may force the date back. Netscape 7.2 is expected to be based on Mozilla 1.7.


#1 hole in head not good -- bad

by buff

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 9:23 AM

Reply to this message

I need another version of Netscape like I need another hole in my head. ;-)

#2 Re: hole in head not good -- bad

by WillyWonka

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 9:25 AM

Reply to this message

How many do you have now?

#5 Re: Re: hole in head not good -- bad

by roseman

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 10:57 AM

Reply to this message

"How many do you have now?" --- how many versions of netscape or how many holes in the head?

#9 Re: hole in head not good -- bad

by WillyWonka

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

Holes. Trepanning is fun! ;)

#10 Re: Re: hole in head not good -- bad

by roseman

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 1:24 PM

Reply to this message

better than having another hole in your MS-IE... we got enuf of those :(

#8 Re: hole in head not good -- bad

by aha <aha@pinknet.cz>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 11:14 AM

Reply to this message

Maybe you don't like it, but for some sort of users this is very good step. Netscape 7.2 is not just rebranded Mozilla 1.7, there are also additional stuff. Some users interested in, some don't. For me is Netscape user still better then Explorer user and always will be =)

#3 Who's working on it?

by stonedyak

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 10:17 AM

Reply to this message

Out of interest, does anyone know who at AOL is actually working on this release? I thought that everyone who was working on Mozilla there has now left.

#7 Re: Who's working on it?

by mlefevre

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 11:13 AM

Reply to this message

I don't know, but it seems that a couple of the Mozilla folks were working on it. I guess AOL contracted with the folks that had left.

#12 Re: Re: Who's working on it?

by polidobj

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 2:45 PM

Reply to this message

Gerv gave a hint to this in his blog: <http://weblogs.mozillazin…gerv/archives/006096.html>

But Blake Ross is one person who was working on the Netscape 7.2 guidebook: <http://www.blakeross.com/archives/000227.html>

#4 ftp directory is already set...

by ezh <ezh@menelon.ee>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 10:37 AM

Reply to this message

#6 ftp directory is already set...

by ezh <ezh@menelon.ee>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 11:04 AM

Reply to this message

#11 blah

by pmsyyz

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 1:41 PM

Reply to this message

They really should have called it 7.5. A .1 increase in version doesn't really reflect all the changes that happened between Mozilla 1.4 and 1.7.

Let's hope they have a Netscape 8 based on Firefox.

But the release on August 3rd will be overshadowed by the release of Doom 3.

#21 Re: blah

by johnlar <johnlar@tfn.net>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 5:04 PM

Reply to this message

As long as they don't release it on the same day at doom3 demo. The simutanious downloads just might bring the internet to its knees.

#24 Re: blah

by wgianopoulos

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 5:43 PM

Reply to this message

Well it would make little sense to release a netscape branded thing based on firefox. The only significant difference between the mozilla suite and Netscape is the bnading and the integration of AIM replacing chatzilla. Do you really want a Firefox integrated with an AIM sidebar?

#31 Re: blah

by sinchi

Thursday July 29th, 2004 5:01 AM

Reply to this message

> Let's hope they have a Netscape 8 based on Firefox.

I hope Mozilla 2.0 Suite will be based on Firefox+Thunderbird

#13 Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!

by bonejob <weirving2@charter.net>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 3:05 PM

Reply to this message

Why would anyone download this AOL spamware? For example, Netscape 7.x has an excellent pop-up filter that has a built-in hole - it stops every pop-up EXCEPT AOL and Netscape ads! Why would ANYONE with the brains God gave broccoli download this ungainly pig when they can get another Gecko browser like Firefox without all the AOL baggage.

For instance, when was the last time you wanted to fire up A.I.M. so you could chat with all the morons, dweebs, flamers and pervs who hang out in AOL chatrooms? And do you REALLY care about support for AOL e-mail? Especially now that every spammer and scammer in the Solar System has AOL's entire account list (Remember that story a few weeks ago about the AOL employee who sold AOL's client list to spammers? After that, why anyone who had an AOL account has actually kept it defies comprehension).

What's more, Netscape 6.x-7.x is less stable than the average Firefox nightly build!

#14 Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!

by ChrisI

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 3:17 PM

Reply to this message

- The popup blocking whitelist is pre-filled, that's all. Just delete the entries, and you're done. - Using Instant Messenger is a matter of choice. It's nice to have options. - Netscape 7.2 uses the Mozilla 1.7.1 code; so whether or not Firefox is more stable depends on whether or not you think seamonkey is more stable than Firefox.

If you prefer Firefox, I'm glad you're happy; but don't try to ruin the party for others, just because they have a different preference. That's trolling.

#16 Re: Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!

by bonejob <weirving2@charter.net>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 3:51 PM

Reply to this message

So every time someone says a discouraging word, it's trolling?? I'm not calling anyone names - no ad hominem here. Nor am I trying to start an argument or a flame war. It's just that my experiences with later versions of Netscape have been negative in the extreme, and that isn't even counting what it took for me to completely get it off my hard drive and out of my registry (too long a story).

Ok, the slamming of AOL Chat was a bit over the top. But I don't think me recounting my experiences with this poor relation of Mozilla/Firefox makes me a troll. It seems like the term "troll" is bandied about and attributed by anyone to anyone who isn't blowing sunshine.

I'll be more careful with my posts if you not be so loose in your use of words like "troll."

#19 Re: Re: Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spa

by Gunnar

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 4:44 PM

Reply to this message

Um, I don't think that 'discouraging comments' were what gave your being a troll away. It's the typical choice of words ("Spaminal"), the "everyone who doesn't think like me is an idiot" attitude. Basically, an inflaming and generally worthless post.

#20 Re: Re: Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spami

by MORA

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 4:58 PM

Reply to this message

You wrote: "Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!" and yet you claim NOT to be a troll?!? Yeah, right.

#17 Re: Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!

by bonejob <weirving2@charter.net>

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 4:10 PM

Reply to this message

P.S. to ChrisI___

MozillaZine tolerates posts by Asa like the one at the URL below, (<http://www.mozillazine.or…message=4&state=reply>).

There is no other word for this but outright nasty. Especially since it was in reply to a posting which was not one I agreed with either, but certainly didn't merit Asa's raging flame. By comparison, my post was very civil and tame.

If the standard of decorum is to be that of a polite and proper tea party, I would ask that the standard be applied to everyone.

#22 Re: Re: Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spami

by arielb

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 5:08 PM

Reply to this message

bonejob...quit it

#26 Re: Re: Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spami

by bzbarsky

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 6:38 PM

Reply to this message

Frankly, that post was as ill-conceived as yours. I'm glad you feel the "others were doing bad things too" argument is soul-soothing, though....

Note that your post is being "tolerated" as much as that one was -- several people had very negative reactions to the other post as well.

#18 Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!

by Gunnar

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 4:40 PM

Reply to this message

"Why would anyone download this AOL spamware? For example, Netscape 7.x has an excellent pop-up filter that has a built-in hole - it stops every pop-up EXCEPT AOL and Netscape ads!" All popup ads can be deactivated. Netscape 7 has a prepopulated white list, but it is up to the user to edit / delete any or all entries.

"For instance, when was the last time you wanted to fire up A.I.M. so you could chat with all the morons, dweebs, flamers and pervs who hang out in AOL chatrooms?" Don't like it, don use it! It's that simple. In addition, ICQ is also integrated, so there's an additional choice

"And do you REALLY care about support for AOL e-mail?" Some apparently do. If you don't, see above.

"What's more, Netscape 6.x-7.x is less stable than the average Firefox nightly build!" Anything is more stable than Netscape 6. As for Netscape 7....whatever floats your boat dude.

#25 Re: Netscrape: UGH!!! What a bloated Spaminal!

by bzbarsky

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 6:36 PM

Reply to this message

> What's more, Netscape 6.x-7.x is less stable than the average Firefox nightly build!

Sorry, but the average Firefox nightly build (trunk or branch) is decidedly less stable (both in terms of crashes and in terms of things not being broken_ than the average 1.7 branch nightly build, from what I can see of the bug reports.

That's a direct corollary of the fact that major work is happening on both trunk and aviary branch and no such work is happening on the 1.7 branch, mind you.

#15 Netscape RIP

by arielb

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 3:21 PM

Reply to this message

the netscape I used to love died a long time ago. There is is however value in a mozilla browser that is adopted by a company that shares our values. A company known to everyone who uses the internet for its search engine, webmail, blogging and other features. A company that perhaps would serve coffee, donuts, wine and even cheese to mozilla developers. Will this company stand up and deliver mozilla technology to millions of people and finally hit IE hard?

#23 Re: Netscape RIP

by thelem

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 5:34 PM

Reply to this message

No, they won't even make the existing Google toolbar for Mozilla official.

#27 Re: Re: Netscape RIP

by arielb

Wednesday July 28th, 2004 8:07 PM

Reply to this message

but Blogger made firefox their recommended browser: <http://help.blogger.com/bin/answer.py?answer=929>

#29 Re: Re: Netscape RIP

by DP3_001

Thursday July 29th, 2004 2:53 AM

Reply to this message

Technically, the Googlebar is still "experimental," so it won't be official until the 1.0 stage.

#28 Wow, I'm so excited (YAAAWWWNN!!!) ;-)

by DP3_001

Thursday July 29th, 2004 2:41 AM

Reply to this message

Why bother using a dumbed-down version of a Gekco-based broswser when you can have the real thing? In any case, I find it funny that they kick Mozilla to the curb, then use their work to put out a Netscape-branded browser.

#30 Re: Wow, I'm so excited (YAAAWWWNN!!!) ;-)

by mlefevre

Thursday July 29th, 2004 3:29 AM

Reply to this message

I don't really see how it's "dumbed down" - it's the same thing with AOL/Netscape bits bolted on.

#32 Puzzled newcomer

by plumduff

Thursday July 29th, 2004 12:40 PM

Reply to this message

I have been using Firefox and Thunderbird for only a few weeks having converted from IE & Outlook because of the recent security scares and now feel much more secure. These appear to be excellent products. If that is the case they can stand alone and do not need to have supporters denigrate competitors in such intemperate and extreme terms. Some of the above posts give the impression that to be a Mozilla fan one must be a semi-literate geek loner. A little moderation would be welcome.

#34 Re: Puzzled newcomer

by Gunnar

Thursday July 29th, 2004 4:33 PM

Reply to this message

Well, it's actually not really that bad. You find trolls/ people with mental issues everywhere, but Mozilla users are definitely not lunatics, or at least the lunatic quota is not higher than that of the general population :-)

The thing that I do find annoying is some people getting into some kind of religious fit over how Firefox is so much better than the Suite, Netscape....even sex I fear. Hey, if it makes them feel like being the elite, that's fine with me. Then again, it's just software - a tool that allows you to browse the web, just like the Suite or Opera. Using it will make your Internet experience more enjoyable, but it won't make anyone a better person.

As long as they don't start burning the 'heretics' at the stake, there is nothing to worry about ;-)

#33 Coming soon...

by jml <info@mozillakirja.com>

Thursday July 29th, 2004 1:53 PM

Reply to this message

They changed the title yesterday; "NOTE: 7.2 CD WILL SHIP SOON." <http://www.netscapestore.com/products/software> Is it August 3rd or a bit later. We here in Finland hope soon.

#35 Netscape CD 5-pack

by WalterK

Thursday July 29th, 2004 4:53 PM

Reply to this message

I'm just curious. Does anyone know what is included in the CD 5-Pack? What can be there 3.5Gb in size? It can't be _full_ source code - proprietary stuff (ICQ, AIM) is never released.

#36 Re: Netscape CD 5-pack

by mlefevre

Friday July 30th, 2004 5:39 AM

Reply to this message

I think you've misunderstood the description - it's not a 5 CD pack, it's a 5-pack of single CDs. That is, you get 5 copies of the same CD (and I don't imagine that the CD is full). It's not a separate item really, it's just a bulk-discount.

While I'm commenting on this article, I see that the 3rd August date on the store site has gone - it now says "soon".

#37 Re: Re: Netscape CD 5-pack

by WalterK

Friday July 30th, 2004 10:49 AM

Reply to this message

Thanks for clarification. That's misleading indeed. Both Netscape store and Mozilla store can use better item descriptions with more detailed narratives for each item. At least brief content listing of each package next to a larger picture would do.