Mozilla and IE

[David Simpson]

Actually, Netscape and IE share a basic code base, while
Firefox shares absolutely no code with earlier versions of
Netscape. It's a completely new program.

Where did you get this ludicrous idea from? Netscape and IE only share
a common look and feel unless, of course, M$ managed to do some
industrial espionage and steal some of the source code.

Netscape eventually made their source code public with the creation of
Mozilla so it is highly possible that some of the original Netscape
source code is still in place.

 

[David Simpson]

The rest is history -- IE kicked Netscape Navigator's rear to kingdom
come.

The only reason that IE kicked Netscape's rear, as you put it, was the
enforced installation of IE with W95 R2 onwards. People were, and are,
lazy and just couldn't be bothered to download a different browser.

What was it YOU were saying about people re-writing history?

 

[donutbandit]

The only reason that IE kicked Netscape's rear, as you put it, was the
enforced installation of IE with W95 R2 onwards. People were, and are,
lazy and just couldn't be bothered to download a different browser.

I used both of them. Netscape Navigator 3 and early 4 was a horrible
browser. IE at that point clearly kicked Netscape's collective arse.

 

[Donkey Agony]

The only reason that IE kicked Netscape's rear, as you put it, was the
enforced installation of IE with W95 R2 onwards. People were, and are,
lazy and just couldn't be bothered to download a different browser.

Then how do you account for the fact that hardly used those browsers
(that came with the OS) until IE4?

What was it YOU were saying about people re-writing history?

You might want to check out the HTML and Stylesheets newsgroups circa
1998 before you continue to add your own name to the list of
truth-impaired fools.

 

[Christopher Jahn]

As I remember it, Netscape's founder and most of their
early programmers had formerly worked on Mosaic. Together
they wrote a faster in-house version of Mosaic to use for
Netscape. For IE, Microsoft licensed Mosaic from Spyglass
Technologies.

At any rate, a "basic code base" is just a core around
which you wrap your own choice of UI and features.
Microsoft could easily have used a UI and feature set all
their own, but instead copied Netscape's choices almost
verbatim.


It may not share any code with the original Netscape but it
appears to share some with the more recent versions - you
can compile Mozilla from the Firefox source package just by
changing some files that control the build process. Doing
that with Firefox 0.7 gave me a functional copy of Mozilla
1.5.

That's because they all use the gecko rendering engine. But
none of them have any code in common with the original
Netscape code, which reached 4.8 before being declared
obsolete.



--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html

Art is beautiful until it becomes real or the truth. (Jonathan
Carroll)

 

[Christopher Jahn]

Where did you get this ludicrous idea from?

It's the fact, jack. IE and Netscape up to version 4.8 are
both based on Mosiac. While there is a lot of divergent
code, they are both based on the same core.




--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html

Art is beautiful until it becomes real or the truth. (Jonathan
Carroll)

 

[Christopher Jahn]

Netscape eventually made their source code public with the
creation of Mozilla so it is highly possible that some of
the original Netscape source code is still in place.

You need to do some research; you are absolutely incorrect.
The original Netscape code was never made public, and is not
used in any Gecko based browsers. Netscape 4.xx is more
closely related to IE than it is to Netscape 6/7.

--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html

Most people do not know how to behave in a massacre.

 

[Christopher Jahn]

Nobody paid any attention to IE versions 1 and 2. But IE3
caught some people's attention because it introduced the
first implementation anywhere of the W3C's Cascading Style
Sheets. By the time IE4 came out, it was by far a superior
browser (engine-wise) to anything from Netscape.

Um, no. Netscape has always been ahead of IE in terms of
development. IE4 became dominant simply because it came
installed with Windows. Why go and buy a browser when you
have one on your computer all ready?

--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html

Most people do not know how to behave in a massacre.

 

[David Simpson]

I used both of them. Netscape Navigator 3 and early 4 was a horrible
browser. IE at that point clearly kicked Netscape's collective arse.

While you are entitled to your opinion I do not share it. I came onto
the internet scene fairly late, 1997, and I found that, for me, IE's
interface was clumsy and non-intuitive. I installed Netscape and took
to it like a duck to water. The biggest problem with Netscape was that
Microsoft encouraged the use of its own non-standard standards just to
leverage more share its way. This left Netscape users high and dry. If
a site didn't display in Netscape most people blamed Netscape whereas
the blame actually lay with Microsoft and their non-compliance with
common standards.

 

[Donkey Agony]

It's the fact, jack. IE and Netscape up to version 4.8 are
both based on Mosiac. While there is a lot of divergent
code, they are both based on the same core.

And Microsoft hired Chris Wilson, who had orginially done the Windows
Mosaic port.

It was Chris Wilson who then convinced Microsoft to implement CSS.
Netscape fought CSS (and later XML) tooth and nail since it conflicted
with its past success in inventing "tags" to "do stuff". Netscape
didn't know it at the time, but that was the beginning of then end.

 

[Donkey Agony]

Um, no. Netscape has always been ahead of IE in terms of
development.

If you consider making up tags to do stuff as "being ahead in terms of
development."

Yes, MS copied what NS was doing. Neither understood markup (at the
time).

IE4 became dominant simply because it came installed with
Windows. Why go and buy a browser when you have one on
your computer all ready?

"Buy"? Although at point NS did sell Navigator, I never knew anyone who
did.

Anyway, I realize MS's bundling obviously had *some* effect -- once they
had a half-way decent browser worth bundling. But it was their CSS
implentation that caused all the web developers I knew (and read about)
to switch. How much the final win was due to MS's bundling and
agressive tactics, and how much was due to a superior core will continue
to be hotly debated. But where I witnessed sea change, it was 100% due
to the latter. And once the web developers are evangelizing, it's hard
to stop the wave.

Netscape realized it too: it created the Mozilla project.

 

[David Simpson]

Then how do you account for the fact that hardly used those browsers
(that came with the OS) until IE4?

1. _Most_ people were not connected at that point in time.
2. Those that were connected were a little more discerning in what
they required and IE just did not fill the niche.
3. Those that were connected were already used to Netscape, liked the
UI and continued to use it.
4. Around 1997-8 the number of users accessing the net seemed to grow
exponentially. These new users were using only the tools that came
with the OS. They didn't know that better tools existed.
5. M$ encouraged the use of its unstandard-standards by giving away
free tools such as Front Page Express which deliberately used tags
which would not render in Netscape at all. This forced those who
didn't know better to use M$ for browsing.

You might want to check out the HTML and Stylesheets newsgroups circa
1998 before you continue to add your own name to the list of
truth-impaired fools.

I lived through it. What was your excuse? Did you read all about it on
some M$ advocacy site? Your M$ blindness gives your real age away.

 

[Christopher Jahn]

If you consider making up tags to do stuff as "being ahead
in terms of development."

Yes, MS copied what NS was doing. Neither understood
markup (at the time).


"Buy"? Although at point NS did sell Navigator, I never
knew anyone who did.

Anyway, I realize MS's bundling obviously had *some* effect
-- once they had a half-way decent browser worth bundling.
But it was their CSS implentation that caused all the web
developers I knew (and read about) to switch.

Developers are not the ones who determine what browser is
used, the users do.

While at some point, developers did start using more MS
proprietary tags, it was the bundling that made the
difference.


--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://home.comcast.net/~xjahn/Main.html

You're never alone with schizophrenia.

 

[truecol]

Many people on this ng seem to favour Mozilla as the internet browser and,
as such, I am inclined to load it. But are there any conflicts that I might
then have with IE (v6). Do I have to disable IE in some way?

(Currently running Win98SE).

Thanks for any advice.

I'm running both without any hitches


SIAOGU

The husband is the head of the house. The wife is the neck. And the neck turns the head.