SillyDog701

[ryaxnb]

Netscape Navigator/Communicator 4.08 was the last Netscape browser released for Windows 3.1x and and 680x0-based Macs; as such, it may still come in handy in a few select cases, however rare.

Otherwise, there's little to say about the Netscape Communicator 4.x series other than that it is technologically obsolete and has been eclipsed by much more modern and competitive Gecko-based browsers. Its CSS support is dreadful, and IMO it hasn't seen any real development since 1998. I almost never use it for anything but testing nowadays.

If given the choice I would still use Netscape 4.8 over IE 6.0, however, though only out of personal loyalties rather than technological reasons.

iCab is friggin' amazing; tabbed browsing with pop-up blocking and full HTML 4 support on up to 17-year old Macs! Weak CSS, though.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913 Firefox/0.10

[David Wonn]

I used Netscape 3 and 4 exclusively 7 years ago. I really loved using 4.04 on a Pentium Pro with 32 megs of RAM at the time. It was common for me to have over 100 browser windows running simultaneously. That itself speaks for how efficient Communicator was (and certainly Windows NT's superior usage of RAM.) Even today, Netscape Communicator is still my default browser, though it's definitely not the only browser I use (as evidenced in the ever-changing UA strings in each of my posts). I'll run down just a few reasons why I still use it:

1. When you're coding a web site, always code in the strictest / pickiest browsers first. I find that by creating pages in Netscape Communicator first (or Opera or even a prior Navigator 3 version), it makes life easier, as the pages will generally render fine in everything else. Many of today's browsers allow for very sloppy code.

2. Communicator does not hog RAM nearly as much as most of the more modern browsers. This alone scores big points in my book (along with Lynx, OffByOne, and even Opera 6.)

3. I still prefer Communicator 4.04's Mail over everything else. It simply works.

4. Composer is quite handy at times. If I want to print a site (say, directions off of mapquest) I can quickly do a File - Edit Page to clean out extra junk like ads, and just print out what I want. If I find an annoying site that forgets a /table tag and shows up empty, I can often hit File - Edit Page to view it. If all else fails, I have other browsers to fall back on.

5. It doesn't do IFRAMEs, which are the most useless tags ever invented. It's safe to say that 99% of sites use IFRAMEs for ads, while the other 1% use IFRAMEs to exploit IE vulnerabilities.

6. I prefer the versions of AIM that came bundled with Communicator over the bloated versions they have now.

Anyway I'll cut it short. For the reasons above, and several others, Communicator will always have a place on my desktop, along with several other browsers.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.08 [en] (Win95; U)

[DJGM]

. . . Many of today's browsers allow for very sloppy code . . .

No, I disagree. Out of all the current browsers available today, only IE (and "wraparounds" that are based
upon it) allow for sloppy code. All the Mozilla based browsers, and Opera are much less forgiving towards
poorly written webpages due to their high level of compliance to recommended web standards.

Netscape 4.x barely complies to any of the current W3C recommended web standards, which makes it as
good as useless for a growing number of current webpages. In 2004, anyone who is serious about web
development, should not be using Netscape 4.x as their primary webpage testing environment, and
should definitely not be using it as their primary web development tool.

Netscape 4.x is a dead browser. It's extinct. It is completely and utterly obsolete. Hardly anyone uses it
nowadays, so what's the point in keeping it installed? Aside from tech-nostalgia, no point whatsoever.

I used Netscape 3 and 4 exclusively 7 years ago.

And that's exactly when Netscape 4.x was still a decent browser!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 - DJGM.co.uk (ax)

[Edward]

I think it, along with Netscape 3, introduced many people to the wonders of the Internet.

I'm sure some people still use it today.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913

[Andrew T.]

I've sometimes found Netscape 4.x to be more error-forgiving than Mozilla and its derivatives when displaying poorly-coded pages. Of course, at the same time Mozilla, Firefox, Netscape 7, and other modern browsers are far more advanced technologically, so overall they are much better at rendering than Netscape 4 nevertheless.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913 Firefox/0.10

[Don_HH2K]

The problem with Netscape 4 right now is its lack of standards. I'd be using it on other machines if it rendered correctly, but since it has limited CSS support, no HTML4.01 support, and no XML/XHTML it's rendering is very poor. If there was a stable Communicator 5 based on Gecko, that'd probably work great. Only problem is Netscape 6, the interface of which is coded in XUL. I've noticed before thaton older machines that XUL rendering is very slow, while Netscape 4's Java interface is much faster. So, the best product here would be something like a Communicator interface with a Gecko rendering engine.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)

[Mandrake]

I've noticed before thaton older machines that XUL rendering is very slow, while Netscape 4's Java interface is much faster. So, the best product here would be something like a Communicator interface with a Gecko rendering engine.

Use Firefox. It's faster than any version of Netscape.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040911 Firefox/0.10

[Andrew T.]

So, the best product here would be something like a Communicator interface with a Gecko rendering engine.

The product most closely meeting those requirements is K-Meleon, which of course is a standalone browser that, like Communicator, uses OS-native controls for its user interface rather than XUL, and uses the Gecko rendering engine.

The only complication is that the user interface itself more closely resembles Internet Explorer in appearance than Netscape Communicator, although it can be changed.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913 Firefox/0.10

[Antony]

So, the best product here would be something like a Communicator interface with a Gecko rendering engine.

The product most closely meeting those requirements is K-Meleon, which of course is a standalone browser that, like Communicator, uses OS-native controls for its user interface rather than XUL, and uses the Gecko rendering engine.

That's why Camino rules!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.5 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.9

[Don_HH2K]

The only complication is that the user interface itself more closely resembles Internet Explorer in appearance than Netscape Communicator, although it can be changed.

But that's the good thing, it's not IE. The interface is a loyalty thing, but the style of IE3 doesn't really resemble IE6 anymore.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)

[David Wonn]

. . . Many of today's browsers allow for very sloppy code . . .

No, I disagree. Out of all the current browsers available today, only IE (and "wraparounds" that are based
upon it) allow for sloppy code. All the Mozilla based browsers, and Opera are much less forgiving towards
poorly written webpages due to their high level of compliance to recommended web standards.

I'll cite some examples of where even Mozilla-based browsers allow sloppy coding (thanks to the "quirks" mode, enabled by default.) At work, they update procedures in Word and then use that to convert to html. Yes, I know Word is the absolute worst excuse for an html editor and I have tried to fight management to get this through their heads, but to no avail. Anyway, Word has this nasty habit of converting image path references with backslashes instead of forward slashes. Netscape Communicator (correctly) complains and shows broken images. With IE and many Mozilla-based browsers, they allow for this incorrect code.

Also, Netscape Communicator correctly complains about URLs with embedded spaces. Most Mozilla-based browsers, IE, and even Lynx(!) seem to do their own things, ranging from conversions to %20s or underscores to simply stripping the spaces. Spaces should never be allowed in URLs without proper escape sequences.

Netscape 4.x barely complies to any of the current W3C recommended web standards, which makes it as
good as useless for a growing number of current webpages. In 2004, anyone who is serious about web
development, should not be using Netscape 4.x as their primary webpage testing environment, and
should definitely not be using it as their primary web development tool.

While it is certainly true that Communicator has its limitations, the vast majority of the newer techniques can be translated into code that Communicator can handle. Seriously. As long as I still get hits from older browsers, I don't want to shut anyone out. Heck, I get hits from handheld devices, including phones! I care about my audience. Obviously I don't expect everyone to test with archaic browsers, such as Mosaic or Cello, but I do try my best to ensure that everyone can at least view the content. Anyway, I don't use Communicator as my primary tool; I simply tend to check with it first.

Netscape 4.x is a dead browser. It's extinct. It is completely and utterly obsolete. Hardly anyone uses it
nowadays, so what's the point in keeping it installed? Aside from tech-nostalgia, no point whatsoever.

Call it dead or whatever you want, but there are situations when you have little or no choice on which browser you can use. At work, it's IE or Communicator. I'll use NCSA Mosaic before I ever touch IE, so the choice is a no-brainer for me.

I used Netscape 3 and 4 exclusively 7 years ago.

And that's exactly when Netscape 4.x was still a decent browser!

So true, it was dominant at one point in time. But as long as it works on even one site, I'm not just throwing it away. It never hurts to have multiple browsers (other than hard drive space, which isn't as much an issue anymore.)

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.78 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Windows NT 5.0; U)

[transcorpsd]

Reasonably fast page loads.
Consistent, reliable performance.
Simple to use and maintain.
Excellent email client.

I like it better than anything else I've ever used. If I do find a page that doesn't appear correctly...no big deal. I simply open Netscape 7 if needed.

Footnote - I would like to buy an original Netscape Communicator 4.x CD for the Macintosh (OS 8/9). If anyone knows where I can find one, let me know. I've already checked eBay.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02

[James]

You've already asked this in another thread. Asking the same question in multiple threads is bordering on spamming the group. Reviving an old thread... four years old, in fact... is ridiculous.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9) Gecko/2008051206 Firefox/3.0