SillyDog701

by **Wellander** » Fri 23 Jan, 2004 10:35 pm

Hi,
Why do Not a lot of sites work with communicator?
I am not happy about this.
Does anybody have any answers?
I want to see more sites work with communicator.
Can We create something that will help developers make sites for older browsers?
What can I say to webmasters?

subject changed from "Why do Not a lot of sites work with communicator?" by Admin

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)

by **Andrew T.** » Fri 23 Jan, 2004 10:53 pm

What do you specify by sites "working?" While I favor web sites capable of being displayed in Communicator, it is unrealistic to expect every site to perform identically in Communicator as in, say, Mozilla 1.x, or even Microsoft IE 5.0.

Netscape 4.x, of course, is six years old and as a product of that era obviously lacks many features and support for features (such as the current CSS implementation) found in modern sites that are supported by the more modern browsers that most use nowadays. A quick look at Hartlandcat's Browser Reference Chart reveals the specifics.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

by **DJGM** » Fri 23 Jan, 2004 10:53 pm

It's simple. Web developers are either designing for those using IE, or more sensibly, with web standards in mind.
Most web developers have long since left Netscape 4.x behind, as it is obsolete, and hardly anyone uses it now.
Any web developers who are still designing websites specifically for users of Netscape 4.x, are living in the past.

Netscape Communicator is a dead browser. It is deceased. Time to let it rest in peace. It is time to move on.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

by **Wellander** » Fri 23 Jan, 2004 11:00 pm

Hi,
I love communicator.
What is wrong with communicator?
It opens today.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)

by **Fulvio** » Fri 23 Jan, 2004 11:26 pm

Some people have had problems with 4.x. There is no way that some sites will work as done today. Even IE 5.0 and cousins are not supported. The term "not supported" is cropping up a lot at sites where all the newest web stds. are followed. Correct me, if I am wrong, but the NS5 project was scrapped just because of the new standards.
There was, and still is some, resistance to NS6/7 and Mozilla, because pages are written for IE, and IE6 to boot. So, get used to the idea that as the years go by 4.x will be harder and harder to use.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7a) Gecko/20040115 Firebird/0.8.0+

by **njhart** » Mon 26 Jan, 2004 2:12 am

I use Netscape 4.79 for email, greatly preferring it to Outlook Express or MS based Earthlink Mail, and find that the Navigator browser works just fine 98% of the time. When it doesn't, I switch to MS IE6 by copy and paste the URL. However, it has occurred to me to wonder if it is possible to make IE6 the default browser to be launched from Netscape mail, and if this is done does it create other problems?

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.79 [en] (Win98; U)

by **Fulvio** » Tue 27 Jan, 2004 11:51 pm

I am not aware of any problems other than if you leave yourself unprotected. It would be desirable leave out IE and OE, and I will be as fair as I can, not because they are inherently bad, but because human beings are bad.
The Microsoft have a very large percentage of the market, so why not hit the most people with the least amount of effort?
However, some websites will insist in opening Internet Explorer, instead of my default Netscape7.1, and I got a blank page. The program is not at fault, but some klutz is.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) (CK-SillyDog)

by **Mandrake** » Wed 28 Jan, 2004 12:01 am

Netscape 4.x would not be much more secure than MSIE 6 . . .

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

by **Wellander** » Wed 28 Jan, 2004 12:03 am

Mandrake wrote:Netscape 4.x would not be much more secure than MSIE 6 . . .

Hi,
Why???
It is alot more sucure esp 4.77,4.78,4.79.
Is it not.
It passed alot of my sucrity tests.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)

by **Mandrake** » Wed 28 Jan, 2004 4:33 am

To prove a point . . . I've run a series of browsers through a popular browser security test (http://bcheck.scanit.be/bcheck/) the browsers were:

Netscape 4
Mozilla 1.6
Internet Exploer 6 SP1 with the latest cumulitive security patch

All tests were run on this computer under XP Pro.

The results are:

Mozilla 1.6: No vunerabilites (6 tests were conducted)

IE 6: No vunerabilites (19 test were conducted)

Netscape 4: No tests conducted - the security test said this: (This browser is very old. It is at least two versions behind the current. It is not supported by the vendor any more and no patches are provided for security problems. That means that it has known vulnerabilities that cannot be fixed without upgrading. We suggest that you upgrade your browser to a newer version and come back to test it. )

I totally agree with what this browser test said.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

by **Wellander** » Fri 30 Jan, 2004 2:43 am

Hi,
Well to me sites should look back at older web browser as no software becomes usless or gets to the point that it does not work as beleive it or not I still use windows 1.0.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)

by **DJGM** » Fri 30 Jan, 2004 2:48 am

And how many browsers do you know that work in Windows 1.0 . . . ?!?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

by **Wellander** » Fri 30 Jan, 2004 2:57 am

Hi,
I know of no browsers that work in windows 1.0.
I wish they did though.

UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0)

by **Fulvio** » Fri 30 Jan, 2004 4:14 pm

Not that I care to use NS4.x, but what does this mean?

<Netscape 4: No tests conducted - the security test said this: (This browser is very old. It is at least two versions behind the current. It is not supported by the vendor any more and no patches are provided for security problems. That means that it has known vulnerabilities that cannot be fixed without upgrading. We suggest that you upgrade your browser to a newer version and come back to test it. ) >

It is an uninformative and meaningless statement. What is their definition of "Netscape 4".

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) (CK-SillyDog)

by **DJGM** » Fri 30 Jan, 2004 6:14 pm

The browser security check site says that automatically for all fourth generation browsers and lower.
Although I do agree with that statement, when it comes to Netscape Communicator 4.x. It's a pity
that site doesn't say the same for IE, as that too is still technically a fourth generation browser.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

SillyDog701

Why do many sites not Communicator friendly?

Why do many sites not Communicator friendly?

Communicator not friendly

Who is online