uh guys i don't really think netscape sucks anymore. i wouldn't say it's better than ie, but i don't think it sucks. now netscape 4... that's a different story...
<< I dont see what is wrong with bundling your browser with your product how is that illegal? >>
It becomes illegal when you have an illegal monopoly. Hmm, now who do we know that has an illegal monopoly? Could it be...SATAN? I mean, Microsoft?
Netscape was a great product, 4.08 standalone is still the fastest and most stable browser I've ever used, unfortunately it's so far out of date that it's not exactly compatible with a lot of the sites out there today.
Netscape lost a lot of ground when Microsoft completely cut away their bottom line by distributing IE for free, bundled with the operating system, with no option of uninstalling. When Netscape lost their revenue, it severely cut their ability to program and innovate on the same level, they had to come up with a new way to make money, which involved relying on ads and trying to direct users to their site, completely taking the focus off of creating a great browser.
From the very beginning, IE was not innovative. Microsoft bought the spyglass browser, which was inferior to NCSA Mosaic to begin with, and they more or less copied every feature the guys at Netscape came up with.
IE had a distinct speed advantage largely because it was integrated into the OS, but also because the IE programmers had access to undocumented system hooks that no other company had any way of knowing about. Netscape programmers managed to find a few of them, and that allowed the netscape browser to be somewhat faster, but still not to the same level.
I will admit that with the latest version of IE, they have surpassed Netscape for sure, and they now have 95% of the browser market share too.
There is still some hope for Mozilla though, each release is more stable, faster, and has better features. I just started using .97 yesterday, and am impressed with the tabbed browsing feature. Unfortunately, it is crashing a little to often for me, but I am confident that they are only a few releases away from something quite stable.
I've been following the browser wars for a long time. The first version of netscape that I used was 1.22, before that I used Mosaic. I was an official beta tester for Netscape version 3, and version 4. I have been a huge fan, and I am getting used to IE, but I still miss the good old days of netscape, and hope for some return to that eventually.
I loathe AOL, but I wish them luck in their battle against Microsoft, it would be wonderful if they took eachother down a couple notches.
Oh yes, btw, the reason AOL integrated the IE browser from the beginning was not because IE was superior, but because it was the only way they could get Microsoft to include AOL software on the desktop...they realized that being bundled on the operating system was a great way to get a large user base (so did microsoft, that's why they integrated IE with the OS).
AOL wasted a fortune buying Netscape and now that it's clear that all that money went down the drain, and the stockholders are pissed, they're trying to blame someone else for their bad business decision - and wasting tons of OUR money in the legal system.
<< It becomes illegal when you have an illegal monopoly. Hmm, now who do we know that has an illegal monopoly? Could it be...SATAN? I mean, Microsoft? >>
Maybe im just dumb but that didn't clearly explain it to me
do you mean that its illegal b/c M$ is a monopoly thus whatever they do it will be illegal
please go into more depth
sir frederick - it sounds like you choose your browsers based on politics rather than competency
<<
<< It becomes illegal when you have an illegal monopoly. Hmm, now who do we know that has an illegal monopoly? Could it be...SATAN? I mean, Microsoft? >>
Maybe im just dumb but that didn't clearly explain it to me
do you mean that its illegal b/c M$ is a monopoly thus whatever they do it will be illegal
please go into more depth >>
Tying a product, that is, forcing a person to buy one product in order to receive another, is illegal if you have a monopoly on that product.
For example, let's say you could only buy gas from Shell, because they had a monopoly, now let's say that shell said you had to buy a cup of coffee if you want to buy gas.
Or let's say they raised the price of gas to cover that cup of coffee, and then said the coffee was free, and forced you to take one every time you got gas.
Whether you like the coffee or not, that's illegal.
<< sir frederick - it sounds like you choose your browsers based on politics rather than competency >>
I choose which products I root for based on politics and past performance. Like I said, I've been using IE, but I hope for a day when Mozilla is a good alternative to IE. When Mozilla is better than or at least equal to IE, I will most certainly use that instead. And it is getting close.
There was a time when Netscape was far better than IE, and no true geek would be caught dead using IE, but times have changed and I'm not in denial of that.
Okay a few questions. Isn't Netscape free? If not it sure as hell should be because it sucks. I've used it, old and new versions, and they all crash too much and just don't load as quickly as IE. What doesn't make sense to me is that AOL uses IE still. What the hell? I don't see how MS could have cost AOL, or Netscape money if you could get AOL on a MS only machine, and could DL both browers for free. This is the gayest assed thing I've ever heard of. If I were MS, I'd be threatening AOL with a pach for all Windows versions that made it so that they couldn't even run AOL. AOL should be groveling at MS's feet for supporting them for so many years. And no, I hate MS, so don't go thinking that about me. I'm currently on a Linux(Mandrake 8.1)/Windows ME dual boot system with AOL on the MS side. I hold no loyalties to either. I just think it's incredibly stupid.
Okay I kinda understand that but how can anyone prove that MS raised the price of windows b/c of IE. What if it was truely free to the public. (cant you d/l it off of MS's site)
AOL is just the biggest fluke ever. They got lucky with their plan to "dominate every stupid people that wants to go online" but they never created anything worthwhile. I hope they lose just because we all know that the worst thing that can happen to the world is to let AOL have more money in their pockets.
I hope the public is invited to address the court in this rediculous, grandstanding lawsuit. Netscape isso far behind in copmarison with IE its laughable that they would even try and use the courts to sell their product. Hell, the public isn't buying because it sucks, so they pull the lawyers in crying foul. Why aren't the conservatives on this forum bitching about this tactic? Or is this OK with them since its a business?
triple shot what are you reffering to in your last sentance as a business?
edit: and were you trying to say something bad about conservatives on this board?
edit: and were you trying to say something bad about conservatives on this board?
Sir Frederick. I don't see the similarity. If I bought gas at Shell, and got a free cup of coffee with it, I'd be happy about getting the coffee. Unless the coffee was crappy, then I'd just be quiet about it and go. If they forced the coffee on me, I wouldn't care, especially if I could just ignore the coffee and go to the water fountain and drink from it just as easily. You can lead a geek to water, but he'll prolly drink whatever caffinated beverage he wants.
MS certaintly hasn't been raising prices to compensate for bundling IE with Windows. 99 bucks for a solid OS is not a bad deal. I've never seen Windows cost less than a hundred dollars even back in the 95 days. (Which was before the bundling ever occurred.) If you don't like IE, don't use it. DL Netscape and use it, and be happy.
MS certaintly hasn't been raising prices to compensate for bundling IE with Windows. 99 bucks for a solid OS is not a bad deal. I've never seen Windows cost less than a hundred dollars even back in the 95 days. (Which was before the bundling ever occurred.) If you don't like IE, don't use it. DL Netscape and use it, and be happy.
<< Sir Frederick. I don't see the similarity. If I bought gas at Shell, and got a free cup of coffee with it, I'd be happy about getting the coffee. Unless the coffee was crappy, then I'd just be quiet about it and go. If they forced the coffee on me, I wouldn't care, especially if I could just ignore the coffee and go to the water fountain and drink from it just as easily. You can lead a geek to water, but he'll prolly drink whatever caffinated beverage he wants.
MS certaintly hasn't been raising prices to compensate for bundling IE with Windows. 99 bucks for a solid OS is not a bad deal. I've never seen Windows cost less than a hundred dollars even back in the 95 days. (Which was before the bundling ever occurred.) If you don't like IE, don't use it. DL Netscape and use it, and be happy. >>
If the coffee were truly free, you might be happy with it, but there is no such thing as a free lunch my friend, they pay the programmers at MS with money taken from somewhere (or to fit my analogy, they buy the coffee beans from somewhere). I'm willing to bet that it's from the sale of the OS (gas) that they get that money. If they haven't raised prices, then their prices have been artificially inflated to begin with, and shoudl be lowered rather than including a "free" cup of coffee (or browser) with the gas.
Furthermore, what if convenience stores (netscape) made all their money on coffee (browser) sales? I bet they wouldn't be selling too much coffee anymore, and some of them would go out of business.
Would they have grounds to sue Shell? Quite probably.
<< Sir Frederick. I don't see the similarity. If I bought gas at Shell, and got a free cup of coffee with it, I'd be happy about getting the coffee. Unless the coffee was crappy, then I'd just be quiet about it and go. If they forced the coffee on me, I wouldn't care, especially if I could just ignore the coffee and go to the water fountain and drink from it just as easily. You can lead a geek to water, but he'll prolly drink whatever caffinated beverage he wants.
MS certaintly hasn't been raising prices to compensate for bundling IE with Windows. 99 bucks for a solid OS is not a bad deal. I've never seen Windows cost less than a hundred dollars even back in the 95 days. (Which was before the bundling ever occurred.) If you don't like IE, don't use it. DL Netscape and use it, and be happy. >>
$299 for XP pro. Anything less would be ridiculous.
$199 for hom.e
$40 for OpenBSD 3.0
<< Would they have grounds to sue Shell? Quite probably. >>
ahhhhh noooo AAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE pun alert
edit: and btw I use opera just in case you were wondering
199 for XP if you get it retail. I know for a fact it can easily be had for 99 dollars and legally at that. As for rather or not MS prices have always been inflated, that's not for me to decide, and I can't change the past. And I still don't get it. Has Netscape ever been free to DL? I would swear that I have DLed it myself for free.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter