| SillyDog701 Forums |
| Author |
Message |
J-M
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
 03 Mar, 2005 5:45 pm |
[sdp=53783] |
|
| Antony wrote: |  Actually you don't need to enter anything. |
Thanks. I don't input anything in another test machine's installation.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050302 Firefox/0.9.6 |
|
| Back to top |
  |
 |
J-M
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| 03 Mar, 2005 5:51 pm |
[sdp=53786] |
|
Installation done now. The default installation directory was C:\Program Files\Netscape\Netscape Browser (I never use default locations in Windows).
Only 'Netscape Browser' icon was created to Desktop. Very, very suprising!
'Netscape' group in All Users\Start Menu\Programs containing only
Netscape Browser (...\netscape.exe)
and
Uninstal (...\NSUninst.exe)
shortcuts now.
NS7.x's netscp.exe is netscape.exe now!
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050302 Firefox/0.9.6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antony
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 12751
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| 03 Mar, 2005 6:01 pm |
[sdp=53787] |
|
| J-M wrote: | | NS7.x's netscp.exe is netscape.exe now! |
It's a good idea to rename netscp.exe to netscape.exe, for at least one good reason... Firewall software.
Some firewall software blocks everything by default. netscape.exe is more meaningful so users would know it should be enabled (if not).
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.5.6 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.12
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don_HH2K
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 4745
|
| 03 Mar, 2005 8:49 pm |
[sdp=53791] |
|
| Antony wrote: | It's a good idea to rename netscp.exe to netscape.exe, for at least one good reason... Firewall software.
Some firewall software blocks everything by default. netscape.exe is more meaningful so users would know it should be enabled (if not). |
Believe it or not, that will not only mess up some firewalls' checksums that validate certain programs (like how ZA validates Netscp.exe), but also it will prevent you from using the shortcuts that the installer already made, and you can just forget about using XP's shortcuts on the Start Menu unless you want to edit the Registry.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Donzilla/0.6PR1 (like Netscape/7.2; wml/1.3)
Laptop: Turion 64 X2 @ 2GHz, 2GB DDR2-667, 100GB HD, ATI Radeon X300, 15" LCD, Seven Ultimate RC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Antony
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 12751
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| 03 Mar, 2005 9:04 pm |
[sdp=53793] |
|
| dluchini30 wrote: | | Believe it or not, that will not only mess up some firewalls' checksums that validate certain programs (like how ZA validates Netscp.exe) ... |
I was talking about for end users to manually enable or disable applications.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/125.5.6 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/125.12
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alice
Alice Wyman
Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 1787
|
| 04 Mar, 2005 5:44 am |
[sdp=53803] |
|
| Antony wrote: | | J-M wrote: | | NS7.x's netscp.exe is netscape.exe now! |
It's a good idea to rename netscp.exe to netscape.exe, for at least one good reason... Firewall software.
Some firewall software blocks everything by default. netscape.exe is more meaningful so users would know it should be enabled (if not). |
I still have Netscape 7.0 and Netscape 7.2 installed, each in it's own program folder and both are still named netscp.exe.... and I don't think anyone is suggesting otherwise, or that you manually rename anything, in case anyone got confused  
The Netscape Browser (NS8Beta, NS8betaPR and the earlier prototype pre-release incarnations) were ALL named netscape.exe.
I don't have Netscape Communicator 4.xx installed on this machine but I recall the NS4.xx executable is named netscape.exe also.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050223 Firefox/1.0.1 (ax) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orizng
David
Joined: 12 Aug 2002
Posts: 325
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| 04 Mar, 2005 11:59 am |
[sdp=53812] |
|
Beta is much better than Pre-Beta.
When using Pre-Beta, my CPU usage constantly rise to 44%, and fan stated to runing all the time. This never happen in this beta version tho.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050302 Firefox/0.9.6
Whatever,whatever,have a nice day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J-M
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| 04 Mar, 2005 2:21 pm |
[sdp=53813] |
|
There is a very interesting Netscape 8.0 review article published in Wall Street Journal Online; http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110980317537668720,00.html .
Unfortunately, this article is for registered subscribers only, but I think there is many WSJ readers here.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050302 Firefox/0.9.6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J-M
Joined: 25 Jul 2004
Posts: 777
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
| 04 Mar, 2005 2:27 pm |
[sdp=53815] |
|
| Alice wrote: | | I don't have Netscape Communicator 4.xx installed on this machine but I recall the NS4.xx executable is named netscape.exe also. |
Right. NS4 executable was (and is) netscape.exe in 4.7 and 4.78 versions, absolutely.
Maybe they were planning something like netscp7 or even netscp72 .exe practice in NS7 versions due to MS-DOS 8+3 compatibility, but then they switched to netscp.exe. Netscape7.exe is too "long" containing nine chars.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050302 Firefox/0.9.6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PW
Peter Weisenbacher
Joined: 01 Dec 2004
Posts: 35
Location: Bratislava, Europe
|
| 05 Mar, 2005 4:28 am My impressions |
[sdp=53845] |
|
First of all big thanx to the Netscape team for keeping Netscape alive. My first impression of the Netscape 8 public beta is that it is still using this awfull Comet skin and I cant turn the search field off, I cant install Firefox extensions or themes too.
But the most important thing for me is that it is using the IE engine as default for the trusted sites, this is insane. You are degradating Netscape too a IE launcher with awfull skin, IE engine should be limited to a number of sites which are known to make problems with Gecko. It is a secutiry risk, insult to the heritage of Netscape and also a stepback for those lazy developers not respecting web standars -STOP THIS, LIMIT IE ENGINE.
Why do you think that a Netscape user who can learn what a passcard is and manage those million setting for tabs and so cant switch to IE for himself when it is necessary? And where is the information which engine I am currently using in the tab as it was in Prototype and Protype 2. I am really sorry but when this issue is not fixed I will stick with NN 7.2 and also not "evangelize" people to use Netscape 8.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
"One nation, one state, one leader" -Adolf Hitler, 1939
"One world, one web, one program" -Bill Gates, 1998
http://ns8.virt.cz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alice
Alice Wyman
Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 1787
|
| 05 Mar, 2005 8:14 am |
[sdp=53850] |
|
Here's what I wrote in the Netscape 8 pre-Beta thread :
| Quote: | On site controls and the IE rendering engine, I also saw:
http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=6092
| Quote: | Re: IE Rendering engine?
by scottiex Friday February 18th, 2005 7:55 AM
<snip> IE is NOT the default rendering engine, and you can even configure the browser to not use IE at all. Click on "Trust Preferences" to turn off their recommended settings if you wish, or you can determine what settings are used when a trusted site is visited. Sorry guys, but this thing is awesome. |
By default, the "Netscape Trust Ratings" are enabled in the Tools > Options > Site Controls > "Trust Preferences". The Netscape Browser comes with a "whitelist" of sites already "verified by a Netscape Security Partner". Most of these "verified" sites are configured to use the Internet Explorer rendering engine, while a select few (Mozilla, mecurila.ca) use Netscape's engine.
As far as new sites added to the site controls list, you can choose your own default setting. Instead of allowing the "Netscape Trust Ratings" to configure my settings, I've changed the Site Controls > "Trust Preferences" setting from "Automatically configure..." to "always use this setting as a default" and I selected "I'm not sure" as the default setting. That way, all sites, both unknown and verified, will open in Netscape.
One thing I noticed,
If you choose the "I trust this site" setting, the site will come up in Internet Explorer. The "I trust this site"... setting is described as "to enable maximum site functionality. If you use "I'm not sure" or "I don't trust this site" setting, then the site will display in Netscape . That makes perfect sense, because Netscape rendering is more secure than IE, and only sites that you trust should ever be opened in Internet Explorer.
Sites which haven't been "verified" by Netscape's "security partners" (the shield icon on the tab will be in yellow) such as sillydog.org, will come up by default with Netscape's rendering engine, which is very good!
However, some people will click the yellow shield on the tab and then might click on "I trust this site". What will happen then, the page will be reloaded and the site is then rendered in Internet Explorer. It's unfortunate that it's been set up that way, equating "I trust this site" with rendering the page in Internet Explorer, with the explanation given, "to enable maximim site functionality". |
Here are some recent comments from
http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=6173
(Netscape Browser 8.0 Beta Released March 3rd, 2005 Talkback article) | Quote: |
The IE option is a good thing (in this case)
by kquiggle
Thursday March 3rd, 2005 11:02 AM
Speaking as an early Netscape protoype tester, there has already been a lot of debate about whether the option to use the IE (Trident) rendering engine is a good thing or not. I am very much in the "It's a great idea!" camp. Here is why: The release of Netscape 8 will put Mozilla technology into the hands of people who would not otherwise use it (or even know about it); this means a lot more "gecko traffic" on the Internet, which will help drive acceptance and support of not-just-IE web standards. The Netscape 8 default rendering engine is Gecko, which means this is what most people will automatically use. It's a sad fact that some web sites just don;t work in anything but IE - Netscape 8 makes these sites accessible, while still encouraging the use of the Gecko engine generally. In short, it's a compromise that recognises reality, but also helps move web users in teh right direction.
In addition, the Netscape browser is a great demonstration of how others can build on the Mozilla platform - there are some good ideas in the Netscape 8 browser (multi-bars, site controls, etc.) which I hope we will see in Firefox eventually.
I recommend that people in the Mozilla community try it out, provide *constructive* criticism, and just generally learn about it. You may find this will help sell Mozilla to people who won't use Firefox.... |
| Quote: | Re: The IE option is a good thing (in this case)
by GoMozilla
Friday March 4th, 2005 8:37 AM
Here is my opinion and criticism, and I will make it as constructive as possible. Most people out there don't use IE and the trident rendering engine because they trust it, most people out there use it because it comes as the default browser with pretty much any modern Windows platform. Despite successful market by the Mozilla Foundation, most people in the world don't really know the difference between the Gecko rendering engine and a hole in the ground. That and also there are people that have grown up on IE and feel an odd discomfort in using other browsers, not because of Trident, but because of the IE skin and name, those people will unfortunately not change their mind because Netscape has a new toy or this is more secure than that. We in the tech community know that the tech community knows Firefox and the Gecko rendering engine, but do you think that a person that doesn't even know what a process is on a computer is gonna know that they can install another browser? I guarantee you not. I think the Netscape 8 is a sell-out, it is a Netscape browser finally saying that IE won in every way, and that is sad and unfortunate. Even though Netscape is now AOL, it is still very sad. On a related note and a comment, I do like the idea of blocking and allowing certain pages to display certain things, that could be useful. |
Mozilla 1.7.5 is still my main browser ( 1.7.6 will be out soon) with Firefox 1.0.1 my second choice. Unfortunately, Netscape 7.2 has unfixed securty issues and I'm afraid Netscape is going to abandon NS 7.2 in favor of NS8.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James
Joined: 12 Jul 2002
Posts: 1746
|
| 05 Mar, 2005 9:00 am |
[sdp=53852] |
|
I agree whole-heartedly with PW. I'm surprised and disappointed to learn that "trusted sites" automatically bring the IE rendering engine to the forefront due to its being the default. It's hard to believe why they would have programmed this into the new browser rather than leaving it to the discretion of the user.
And I fully agree with Alice's conclusion regarding her remaining with Mozilla as her default with FF backing it up. I think I've played with this beta long enough now to satisfy my curiosity. At this point I'm consigning it to the backburner.
The question I pose is this: WHY? Why did they resurrect this browser? What was their intent? 
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050223 Firefox/1.0.1
James
It's later than you think.
Firefox 3.5.3, IE 8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alice
Alice Wyman
Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 1787
|
| 05 Mar, 2005 9:39 am |
[sdp=53853] |
|
| James wrote: | | I'm surprised and disappointed to learn that "trusted sites" automatically bring the IE rendering engine to the forefront due to its being the default. It's hard to believe why they would have programmed this into the new browser rather than leaving it to the discretion of the user. |
In the Pre-Beta thread | I wrote: | | Antony wrote: | | Alice wrote: | One thing I noticed,
If you choose the "I trust this site" setting, the site will come up in Internet Explorer. The "I trust this site"... setting is described as "to enable maximum site functionality. |
Please see my post on page 3 of this thread |
| Antony, in his earlier post, wrote: | The default setting for rendering trusted sites is set to Internet Explorer.
I wonder what is Netscape doing... |
What Netscape is doing, without saying so in so many words (in my opinion):
1. ASSUMING that people prefer using Internet Explorer to render pages, since it will "enable maximum site functionality"
2. ASSUMING what people mean when they say, "I trust this site" is, that this site is OK to display in Internet Explorer because it doesn't contain anything harmful. This is COMPLETELY ignoring the possibility that some users PREFER using Netscape, even for trusted sites! The "I trust this site" setting is therefore misleading.
3. The "I'm not sure" setting, in which you want to "balance functionality and security ".. (you're not sure if you trust the site.... the site MAY contain harmful content) PROPERLY displays the page like Netscape, which is a SAFER, more Secure browser. However, that IMPLIES that functionality will suffer when Netscape page-rendering is used. |
The whole idea behind Netscape 8 is to balance security with functionality. Unfortunately or not, "functionality" is equated with Internet Explorer, while Netscape is, rightly so, equated with "security". As mentioned by others, you can change the Site Controls default settings so that Internet Explorer NEVER opens, but that defeats the purpose of using Netscape8.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041217 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don_HH2K
Joined: 09 May 2004
Posts: 4745
|
| 05 Mar, 2005 10:43 am |
[sdp=53854] |
|
I'm about to download the new release from ftp.gftp.netscape.com, it turns out that there are actually two files there that appear to have the same content judging by their size. There are NSB-install-BETA.exe and NSbrowser-final-beta.exe, both of which are exactly 12275573 bytes in size. Any idea what the difference between the two are, and which one I should be downloading?
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Donzilla/0.6PR1 (like Netscape/7.2; wml/1.3)
Laptop: Turion 64 X2 @ 2GHz, 2GB DDR2-667, 100GB HD, ATI Radeon X300, 15" LCD, Seven Ultimate RC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
beanboy89
Joined: 16 May 2004
Posts: 1470
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Search
Log in
Search | FAQ | Rules and Policies
| MozInfo701 - Mozilla Information Centre
| SD701 Open Directory
| Message Board Map
| download Netscape
