SillyDog701

[Antony]

According to InformationWeek, Marc Andreessen, the guy who originally developed and founded Netscape, is backing a startup company for a new better browser.

Netscape lost the browser and Web server market to Microsoft. Now, the developer-turned-financier is backing RockMelt, which is staffed by two of Andreessen's close associates, The New York Times reported Thursday, quoting people knowledgeable with his investment.

Very little is known about RockMelt's technology. The company's Web site offers no information, but people can submit their e-mail to stay abreast of future updates.
In an interview with the Times earlier in the summer, Andreessen said that today Web has become a network of complex Web sites that need a new kind of browser to effectively deliver services to end users. "There are all kinds of things that you would do differently if you are building a browser from scratch," Andreessen told the Times.

For full story, please refer to Netscape Founder Andreessen Backs New Browser (InformationWeek)

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.0.13) Gecko/2009073021 Firefox/3.0.13

[Don_HH2K]

I haven't seen any mention of what RockMelt's underpinnings will consist of. With the extensive work on free software HTML renderers and JavaScript VM's that's been done by Mozilla, Google, and Apple, it would seem almost counterproductive to build a totally new engine from the ground up. If they don't, though, it doesn't seem like there will be much separating RockMelt from, say, Flock.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090805 Shiretoko/3.5.2

[Ginkan]

lets see

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; zh-HK) AppleWebKit/531.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.3 Safari/531.9.1

[Edward]

Why not buy Netscape from AOL and use RockMelt's technology to launch a new Netscape?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090823 SeaMonkey/1.1.18

[DJGM]

Why not buy Netscape from AOL and use RockMelt's technology to launch a new Netscape?

AOL have so seriously devalued Netscape, and everything associated with it over the last ten years
(except for Mozilla) I could acquire Netscape in its entirety with the loose change in my left pocket!

They may as well just give away what's left of Netscape for nowt to whoever might want it!



Cynicism aside ... as great as Netscape once was, sadly, nobody really cares about it anymore.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 SeaMonkey/1.1.17 Firefox/3.x

[James]

Cynicism aside ... as great as Netscape once was, sadly, nobody really cares about it anymore.

I'd have to agree with Greg. Netscape is yesterday's news and yesterday's news is of limited value. Technology is moving to fast to try and resurrect some dead browser. And why do we need yet another browser? SeaMonkey is essentially Netscape without all the bloat. Those who pine for NS should simply download SM and adopt a NS skin. Voila: Netscape!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

[Antony]

Cynicism aside ... as great as Netscape once was, sadly, nobody really cares about it anymore.

Very nicely said.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2

[Edward]

Cynicism aside ... as great as Netscape once was, sadly, nobody really cares about it anymore.

I'd have to agree with Greg. Netscape is yesterday's news and yesterday's news is of limited value. Technology is moving to fast to try and resurrect some dead browser. And why do we need yet another browser? SeaMonkey is essentially Netscape without all the bloat. Those who pine for NS should simply download SM and adopt a NS skin. Voila: Netscape!

I don't think they would be resurrecting the browser, but the name. The technology under the hood would be new, so it wouldn't be the same as the "old" Netscape.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090825 SeaMonkey/1.1.18

[James]

But you have to ask yourself... why bother? Haven't we enough browsers today without adding yet another?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

[Fulvio]

Some people do not want to make any change, and they were happy with some Netscape, whatever it was. I chose to be set up with Netscape4.x by my ISP, before it went all-Microsoft, and I continued following the development of Netscape, and successors.
At this point, I would be willing to try anything new, as none of the existing browsers fit my needs.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2

[James]

Some people do not want to make any change, and they were happy with
At this point, I would be willing to try anything new, as none of the existing browsers fit my needs.

Alright, Fulvio. Let me take the part of the devil's advocate on this one. When you say that none of the existing browsers "fits (sic) your needs" exactly what does that mean? I hear this all the time from people on the Opera forum... and occasionally from people on the Mozillazine forum and I wonder: what on earth are they talking about? Firefox does what I want: allows me to browse the internet. It provides security... it provides several extensions that make browsing more enjoyable (i.e. Ad-block, McAfee Site Advisor and LastPass)... and it has tabs and a sidebar so that I can find what I'm looking for easily and more efficiently. What more could I possibly want or expect? Nothing really. So, tell me why no existing browsers fit your needs. I'm very curious.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

[Edward]

But you have to ask yourself... why bother? Haven't we enough browsers today without adding yet another?

I think it's safe to say that there are currently five mainstream browsers out there: IE, SeaMonkey, Opera, Firefox and Safari.

Having one more browser? I think the market might be able to support a few more.

UserAgent: Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en) Presto/2.2.15 Version/10.00

[James]

But you have to ask yourself... why bother? Haven't we enough browsers today without adding yet another?

I think it's safe to say that there are currently five mainstream browsers out there: IE, SeaMonkey, Opera, Firefox and Safari.

Having one more browser? I think the market might be able to support a few more.

Possibly, Edward, although I can't for the life of me see another browser making a success of it, especially given the attempts of Opera to establish itself for years on end and yet rarely rising about 2% of the overall user population.

But that does not really answer my question to Fulvio. He claims that NONE of the existing browsers meet his needs. What needs? How is it that IE, SeaMonkey, Opera, Firefox, Safari and Chrome fail to meet all of his needs? I'm very curious to know what those needs might be and how there isn't a single browser that can adequately handle them.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)

[Edward]

I have downloaded and installed Opera 10 under Windows. However, I do not like it, as I went to more than one secure https:// web site and Opera 10 did not report it as a secure site...

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090825 SeaMonkey/1.1.18

[James]

What about this much-trumpeted Turbo engine? Do you notice pages opening faster than Firefox or the older Opera version? What about the issue with footers that you've had in the past?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.2) Gecko/20090729 Firefox/3.5.2 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)