| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Is the End Near for Netscape? | |
|
||
| Time: 00:00 EST/05:00 GMT | News Source: PC World | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
The death knell is sounding for the Netscape browser, industry observers said, following America Online's decision Tuesday to lay off about 50 Netscape software developers and end development work on the Mozilla browser technology. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 326 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:45:39 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 5912 (62.192.124.170) at 7/18/2003 7:24:33 AM |
| Sic Transit Gloria Mundi... |
| #2 By 10896 (65.213.122.66) at 7/18/2003 8:37:00 AM |
| And hopefully the end of Mozilla too, as AOL is cutting off the funding. |
| #3 By 61 (24.92.223.112) at 7/18/2003 8:53:34 AM |
| Why would you hope for the end of a perfectly good browser? |
| #4 By 2960 (68.100.231.92) at 7/18/2003 9:16:25 AM |
|
Yeah, but I think it's lookin' good for Mozilla/Phoenix/Thunderbird finally.
Netscape has just become an AOL Ad infested version of the real thing. TL |
| #5 By 2960 (68.100.231.92) at 7/18/2003 9:18:39 AM |
|
#3,
Your data is incorrect. A Mozilla foundation was started, and AOL kicked in some 2-3 Million to start it. The rest will come from outside sources. If anything, Mozilla has been set free from the binds of AOL and can flourish now. TL |
| #6 By 10896 (65.213.122.66) at 7/18/2003 12:45:53 PM |
|
#6 Wow 2-3 million, that it will keep it alive for a few months and then it will be selling T-shirts and Mugs, and begging for money like all the OSS projects.
#4 Because it is OSS and there are already too many useless browsers. |
| #7 By 10896 (65.213.122.66) at 7/18/2003 12:59:58 PM |
|
#12 Go read the GNU manifesto and see why I dont like Linux and Open Source.
Their stated aim is to put programmers out of jobs and everybody codes for free. |
| #8 By 2960 (68.100.231.92) at 7/18/2003 1:58:10 PM |
|
Mr. Dee,
Actually, there are still a quiet a few large corporations that use Netscape and Netscape Server technology for their email needs. Not everyone buys into the Exchange Server thing... TL |
| #9 By 61 (24.92.223.112) at 7/18/2003 2:16:32 PM |
|
Only reason I use Mozilla is because of the pop-up blocking... I HATE pop-ups, I've never clicked a pop-up, never will just because the ad is being forced on me and takes over as the selected window when in the middle of doing something.
I really do consider Gecko to be inferior to the IE engine in terms of how stuff is rendered. Gecko may be more standards compliant, but you can do a lot of cool stuff with IE, not to mention pages always look better in IE. |
| #10 By 20 (67.9.179.51) at 7/18/2003 6:07:20 PM |
|
#18: I use Proxomitron for pop-up and ad blocking. Why compromise your browser for something that's not really browser-specific?
As far as standards compliant, I hear that all the time, but every time I start a new web project and I start writing 100% compliant HTML and CSS, it just seems that Mozilla can never render half of the stuff I do. I guess Mozilla is good if you write really simple compliant code, but if it gets even the least bit complicated, forget it. Mozilla's CSS support is horrid. Anyone who says otherwise is full of crap. I can't get even the simplest CSS things to work like height and pixel-control of objects like textboxes and tables. |
| #11 By 61 (24.92.223.112) at 7/19/2003 12:25:38 AM |
| daz: Yeah, but I do enjoy using tabs, and my integrated google search bar (the googlebar supplied by Google is a bloated piece of trash). |
| #12 By 10896 (24.25.182.11) at 7/19/2003 8:12:18 AM |
|
cba-3.14
Not the GPL but the GNU Manifesto. See below the founders explanation of their philosophy. "Don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?" If anything deserves a reward, it is social contribution. Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. If programmers deserve to be rewarded for creating innovative programs, by the same token they deserve to be punished if they restrict the use of these programs. "Shouldn't a programmer be able to ask for a reward for his creativity?" There is nothing wrong with wanting pay for work, or seeking to maximize one's income, as long as one does not use means that are destructive. But the means customary in the field of software today are based on destruction. Extracting money from users of a program by restricting their use of it is destructive because the restrictions reduce the amount and the ways that the program can be used. This reduces the amount of wealth that humanity derives from the program. When there is a deliberate choice to restrict, the harmful consequences are deliberate destruction. The reason a good citizen does not use such destructive means to become wealthier is that, if everyone did so, we would all become poorer from the mutual destructiveness. This is Kantian ethics; or, the Golden Rule. Since I do not like the consequences that result if everyone hoards information, I am required to consider it wrong for one to do so. Specifically, the desire to be rewarded for one's creativity does not justify depriving the world in general of all or part of that creativity. "Won't programmers starve?" I could answer that nobody is forced to be a programmer. Most of us cannot manage to get any money for standing on the street and making faces. But we are not, as a result, condemned to spend our lives standing on the street making faces, and starving. We do something else. But that is the wrong answer because it accepts the questioner's implicit assumption: that without ownership of software, programmers cannot possibly be paid a cent. Supposedly it is all or nothing. The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as now. Restricting copying is not the only basis for business in software. It is the most common basis because it brings in the most money. If it were prohibited, or rejected by the customer, software business would move to other bases of organization which are now used less often. There are always numerous ways to organize any kind of business. Probably programming will not be as lucrative on the new basis as it is now. But that is not an argument against the change. It is not considered an injustice that sales clerks make the salaries that they now do. If programmers made the same, that would not be an injustice either. (In practice they would still make considerably more than that.) |
| #13 By 20 (67.9.179.51) at 7/19/2003 12:28:34 PM |
|
#24: The GNU manifesto bears striking resemblance to the Communist manifesto.
All the stuff about humanity derriving value from work and how paying for it only benefits the few and the elite and not the workers, etc is almost straight out of Marx's discussions and writings. Be afraid... |
| #14 By 135 (208.186.90.91) at 7/19/2003 2:22:00 PM |
|
I use google's new tool bar for popup blocking, very nice.
cba-3.14 - "That's not in the GPL, I've never read that on their site, it's not true." This is called shoving your head firmly in the sand and yelling "NYAH NYAH NYAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" style of debate. The GNU Manifesto(which I have actually read unlike you) says quite clearly that once they ban high paying programmer jobs, it will be quite easy to get everybody to work for free. billmac - "The real reason programmers will not starve is that it will still be possible for them to get paid for programming; just not paid as much as now. " God I hate shills like you who work for the suits. It's no surprise that the people who founded Redhat were finance majors and not computer programmers. |
| #15 By 135 (208.186.90.91) at 7/19/2003 7:01:04 PM |
| JaggedFlame - DOH! I guess I didn't read his whole post. :) I thought he was just feeding us the GNU Manifesto party line. :) Sorry billmac! |
| #16 By 2960 (68.100.231.92) at 7/20/2003 1:00:08 PM |
|
#30,
Given Microsoft's new plans, I figure it will cost about $99 for the home version, and about $200 for the pro version if future Windows releases are priced the same... TL |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 326 Last | Next |
The time now is
4:45:39 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
