Posted on 08/28/2002 12:52:10 PM PDT by Bush2000
Tech doesn't buoy Netscape browser
Despite new technology, Netscape continues to lose ground to Internet Explorer, which now has well over 90 percent of the market. A twice-yearly study from StatMarket, a division of WebSideStory, showed that despite recent technological advances, AOL Time Warner's Netscape Communications browsers, which use technology from the open-source Mozilla project, have ceded more ground to Microsoft's Internet Explorer.
According to the study, Netscape browsers are losing market share at a steady clip, falling to a new low of 3.4 percent as of this week. A year ago, Netscape' market share stood at 13 percent, but fell steeply to 7 percent by March as IE 6 gained popularity.
"The newest versions of Netscape have failed to win over users so far," Geoff Johnston, vice president of product marketing for StatMarket, said in a statement. "Unless AOL makes a move soon, Netscape may find itself battling Opera for the last 1 percent to 2 percent of the market."
IE has now reached 96 percent market share, according to StatMarket, up from 87 percent a year ago. Mozilla gained some market share when it finally launched a 1.0 release earlier this year, but browsers such as Mozilla and Opera still only accounted for less than 1 percent of the market, StatMarket said.
AOL's plans for boosting Netscape market share hinge on the possibility of introducing Netscape as the basis for the integrated AOL Web browser, which would put it into the hands of tens of millions of consumers. AOL has taken steps toward this end with a version of its CompuServe service that uses Netscape's Gecko Web-page rendering engine, and a new test version of AOL for Mac OS X that also uses Netscape technology.
At this point, however, competing browsers face an increasingly difficult task in battling the IE monolith. Because of its market dominance, Web designers generally test their pages on IE alone, with the result that pages sometimes do not render correctly in other browsers--even if those browsers are more standards-compliant than IE.
Netscape has begun actively tracking down popular Web sites that do not render correctly in its browser and encouraging the sites to fix the errors. The company said it has now eradicated errors from most popular sites.
StatMarket gathers its figures from more than 125,000 sites that use its services.
That is completely at odds with my experience. I switched from Netscape to IE at version 3.0 of each because Netscape was crashing three or four times during a two-hour session of browsing. In the four or five years since then, I'd guess IE has locked up perhaps three times total, and I don't recall any lockup in IE6 on Windows XP, which is what I've been using for the last nine months.
Why is MS excited about a 96% market share for a free product? The higher the market share, the higher the support/maintenance costs for MS... with no associated revenue. It ain't like people are going to stop using WindowsXP because it doesn't have an integrated web browser.
I guess I don't see how IE helps MS. Just the bandwidth costs alone (for providing free downloads and updates) would choke any company south of an IBM or General Motors.
I wonder if they contacted the webmaster at microsoft.com? :-)
Seriously, though, as several people mentioned earlier in this thread... It is a royal pain to develop for multiple browsers. Especially for different DOM and javascript implementations. But people are still doing it.
Pre-circa-2002, I ran into a lot of problems surfing rushlimbaugh.com using Netscape 4.7. It seemed to be designed for IE exclusively. However, now it seems to work very well with Netscape 4.7. I don't know what they did, but I suspect that they eliminated proprietary extensions after Netscape users complained (and stopped subscribing to Rush 24x7.).
Therein lies the problem for Netscape. Instead of fixing their browser to properly display the websites, they are asking the websites to reprogram their code to accomodate them! If my company adopted that business strategy, they'd be going down the tubes too.
I should hope so. That was a year before linux-0.01 (which was labeled as a pre-alpha, not production) was released.
IMO, IE is the best browser out there. But that doesn't translate into MS having the ability to charge money when there is competition that doesn't charge. Back in the days of IE 2.0 versus Netscape 2.0, Netscape had the better quality... but they couldn't beat free. Computer users, on the whole, are really a bunch of cheapskates. :-)
Yes Mozilla has a built in pop up stopper. I haven't tried to adjust the settings though since the default setting is fantastic at stopping pop ups. I have very rarely had a pop up sneak through, but it is flexible enough that it won't interfere with a website that uses multiple windows (something I can't say about anhy of the 3rd party pop up stoppers that I've used).
Uh huh. It was an interesting time. I recall chatting with several companies about what I was seeing with Linus and "Linux". One company was the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO). SCO's response was to ignore things. And that's what they did. In the face of disruptive technology. Others did the same. Others do now. The game is far from over....
At that time and even through around 1998, that was an appropriate response. After all, how long has Stallman been promising The Hurd without delivering? There's serious corporate muscle behind Linux kernel development now and things are developing quickly.
If it isn't released under a license similar to the GPL, QPL or BSD license it's irrelevent. It would simply make creating new hacks that much easier. The only thing that has saved Microsoft's ass is that IE's source isn't open. The Mozilla team doesn't have that luxury. They have to be a bit more conscious of the potential problems with releasing bad code.
Mozilla is built to be compliant with W3C specs for HTML, Javascript, etc. If a page won't render correctly in Mozilla (ergo NS 6 and 7) it means the site was built specifically for IE. If the site uses IE specific features and not W3C standards then you shouldn't expect Netscape to load it properly. What Netscape is doing is saying "WRITE TO THE F%#$ING ACCEPTED STANDARDS!!!!" in a more polite way. Many users have been bitching about this for years. The Mozilla hackers are more concerned with standards that'll work consistantly on all supported platforms, not locking in developers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.