The end of an era as AOL officially retires Netscape

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

December 28, 2007, 9:54 PM

As we bid adieu to 2007 and prepare to enter the new year, AOL is also saying goodbye to memories: the company has finally killed off the Netscape Web browser - or what was left of it, anyway.

March 31, 2008 will mark 10 years since the Netscape development team opened up the source code to the browser that ushered in the Internet era. With its acquisition of Netscape in 1999, AOL continued that effort and helped launch the Mozilla Foundation into an organization that has taken on Microsoft and shaped the Web as we know it today.

But Netscape's time has long since passed due to the arrival of Firefox and AOL's struggles to stay relevant in an increasingly broadband-connected decade. Netscape 6, the first browser based upon the Mozilla source code, debuted in 2000 and was succeeded two years later by Netscape 7, also a rebranded version of Mozilla.

Meanwhile, Internet Explorer quickly took over Windows desktops and Netscape's market share dwindled to single digits.

The demise of Netscape wasn't a big surprise to most. When the Internet bubble burst, there was little money to fund development of a product that could compete with something Microsoft gave away for free. Even the Mozilla foundation barely limped along with help from AOL until Google laid its golden egg: advertising in search results.

Google -- Microsoft's online nemesis -- inked a deal to give the Mozilla Foundation a cut of advertising revenues when users searched from its browsers. The money aided the development of Firefox, which has become so successful that the organization has even stopped producing its namesake Mozilla suite, although a group of developers continue to work on it under the name "Seamonkey."

In 2005, thanks to the growing success of Firefox backed by Google, AOL revived the Netscape browser hoping it could offer a more consumer-friendly alternative. Netscape Browser 8, as it was called, bulked up Firefox's security with a "Trust Rating" system for Web sites, and took a unique approach to compatibility by enabling users to render Web pages using Internet Explorer's engine directly within Netscape.

Despite limited acceptance of the reborn Netscape version 8, AOL pressed forward with development, promising and delivering version 9 in October 2007 while bringing back the Netscape Navigator moniker. While version 8 of Netscape was largely outsourced to Mercurial Communications, AOL built its own development team for Navigator 9.0.

But the effort didn't last long, due to organizational changes within the company and an overall lack of success.

"While internal groups within AOL have invested a great deal of time and energy in attempting to revive Netscape Navigator, these efforts have not been successful in gaining market share from Microsoft's Internet Explorer," AOL's Tom Drapeau wrote on the Netscape blog Friday. "Recently, support for the Netscape browser has been limited to a handful of engineers tasked with creating a skinned version of Firefox with a few extensions."

Drapeau noted that AOL is not able to invest in Netscape as it once did, adding that, "we feel it's the right time to end development of Netscape branded browsers, hand the reins fully to Mozilla and encourage Netscape users to adopt Firefox."

Security patches for Netscape Navigator 9 will be released through February 1, 2008 at which point all product support will cease for the current release and all previous Netscape versions. This includes Netscape v1-v4.x, Netscape v6, Netscape v7 Suite, Netscape Browser v8, and Netscape Navigator/Messenger 9.

Those nostalgic for the days before the Web was filled with phishing scams and other malware can install a Netscape theme atop Firefox. Netscape.com will continue to exist, although the site has retained only a fraction of its original users after a year-long experiment in which it became a community driven news site like Digg.com before reverting back to a general portal.

It may appear an unceremonious death for Netscape's eulogy to be written in a developer blog post on an idle Friday afternoon at the cusp of a new year. But as we look forward to Mozilla's 10th anniversary, we can also look back and appreciate the immense impact that Netscape has had by bringing the World Wide Web to computer screens in every corner of the planet and connecting us like never before.

Goodbye, Netscape; thanks for the memories. October 1994 - October 2007.

Add a Comment (112 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By premier69

edited Jan 14, 2008 - 11:25 AM

r.i.p.

Score: 0

By horsecharles

posted Jan 3, 2008 - 11:53 AM

Too bad-- Netscape is more suitable to corporate / professional environments than any other GoofZilla(MalZilla, MoeZilla, MisZilla pick your nickname) product.

Hopefully someone will take it over.

Score: 0

By roj

edited Jan 2, 2008 - 10:26 AM

Good riddance - that browser died after version 3.

Score: 0

By Sven123456789

edited Nov 11, 2008 - 11:57 AM

ajollyjo - Dumbest beta user in history.

Score: 0

By ajollyjo

edited Jan 16, 2008 - 9:31 PM

I could have read your comments much easier if
you had used the proper word "their" (meaning them)instead of "there" (meaning somewhere out
yonder"

Score: 0

By Sven123456789

edited Nov 12, 2008 - 10:11 AM

Really moron. Doy der duh.

Score: 0

By merlin666

edited Jan 2, 2008 - 10:44 AM

I think the browser history in some of the comments is somewhat off. For one, several experimental browsers were around before NCSA Mosaic came out in 1992 ... but I think that Mosaic was the first popular browser. Also Mosaic did not vanish, MS bought the license in 1995 from Spyglass and developed it into IE. This was acknowledged at least up to IE 5.

Score: 0

By W@KK0

posted Jan 1, 2008 - 3:10 AM

Retired Netscape... again....

Score: 0

By TomA102210

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 11:20 AM

By foxfyre said:

One might wonder how far behind Netscape AOL might be...
------------------------------------------
In the first place, why would you care. Secondly,don't hold your breath. AOL has a lot of life left in it.

Score: 0

By isavedlatin

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 2:05 PM

Yeah AOL still has AIM which is by far the most popular instant messaging client (at least in the US). They have to be making a ton of money off those little ads I keep accidentally clicking.

Score: 0

By DatabaseBen

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 10:06 AM

if i recall, it was because of netscape that we all had been enjoying browsers for free for many years.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 12:42 PM

it was because of IE being included in Win....then everything became free.
MS made the logical decision to make IE free, due the the integration into mainstream everyday computing. Some wanted you to pay for their supposedly "superior" browsers, but now they all have to be free.(or should be)

Score: 0

By DatabaseBen

edited Jan 3, 2008 - 10:55 AM

at that time, if one recalls, M$ was being sued for its aggressive and unethical behaviors.

At that time M$ stole the browser idea and then included in windows as a standard program. It was not as good as Netscape so no one was going to pay for it.

Further M$ deliberately excluded all other browsers from the setup with windows at installation.

Netscape then vowed to use all of its financial resources to fight M$.

Of course, that was back then and Netscape never really recovered from the wounds of the "Browser Wars"

I think there was a 60 minutes show or something on the tribulations of the Netscape company. The emphasis on the show was how the company switched from making money by directly selling its browser to making money via adware that supported the free netscape browser.

Score: 0

By Jegar48

posted Jan 1, 2008 - 12:02 PM

Revisionist crap.

Score: 0

By alphatrigon

posted Jan 1, 2008 - 4:12 PM

bravo, nice non support of your own views. I am glad I have the views of do. Go lookup data

Score: 0

By pitdingo2

edited Jan 1, 2008 - 9:20 PM

Netscape let you download their browser for free. If you paid for it, you were a complete fool.

Score: 0

By bobthegoat2001

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 6:14 AM

Now you can but not when it first came out. Don't you know your history?

Score: 0

By pitdingo2

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 7:15 AM

you obviously don't. Netscape was always free to download. You could register your version and pay for it, or just run the evaluation version which never expired.

I guess you must have been one of the people that paid. LOL. I never did.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

edited Jan 2, 2008 - 2:39 PM

You obviously has no clue. Netscape only free because MS released IE free of charge.

Score: 0

By pitdingo2

edited Jan 2, 2008 - 3:18 PM

How exactly do i not have a clue? The browser was always free to download. You fail.

Sure, M$ leveraged their desktop monopoly to "cut off Netscape's air supply". Once they killed competition, they left IE to rot, and only started work on it again, after the rise of Firefox. Prime example of why monopolies are bad.

But that is how M$ operates...leverage the OS monopoly to dominate other markets...they do not actually compete, because they can not.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 3:37 PM

Actually, it's a prime example of progress and competition. One product wasn't filling a need so another came forward to fill it.

This is how the market works. :)

I know, I know, it doesn't make Microsoft look like a horrible bad guy. It's amazing how reality rarely intersects with your rabid accusations, isn't it? You'd think the law of averages might actually attempt to catch up with you at some point....

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 2:07 PM

U so smrt... u don't need 2 obay lisennse agreemunts or turms..

lol

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 8:57 AM

One might wonder how far behind Netscape AOL might be...

Score: 0

By isavedlatin

edited Dec 31, 2007 - 2:03 PM

According to w3schools.com, as of December 2006 0.2% of people used Netscape. They didn't bother tracking Netscape in 2007 since it was lower than 0.5% to start the year. Here's their stats page: http://www.w3schools.com...sers/browsers_stats.asp

Score: 0

By DoHickey

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 7:52 AM

So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, goodbye.
(I couldn't help myself giving Netscape a Sound of Music send off)

Score: 0

By fredreed2001

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 9:25 PM

Aol should be ashamed of themselves for what they are doing to netscape, I have used the netscape web browser for years and now it looks like Aol doesn't care about the people who supported or used netscape over the years. All Aol wanted to do was buy out netscape and then get rid of the whole company including the web browser.I can no longer say that Aol will be a good company to support because I no longer will support Aol.

Score: 0

By improvelence

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 8:50 PM

I should be more upset but its kinda like watching your grandfather live off of a machine for 10 years and then one day he just ups and dies, I made my peace a long time ago.

Plus, Seamonkey is essentially the same thing yet new and improved.

Score: 0

By ZenWarrior

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 6:09 PM

Love the article's last line, Nate. Was about the write the same myself. RIP, Netscape. We had fun times back in the day.

(What's Marc up to now? Maybe I missed it in the article, but his name certainly deserves a mention.)

Score: 0

By robmanic44

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 5:52 PM

Seamonkey is actually a much underused product. It's superior to Firefox in many ways and you don't have to spend all that time adding extensions.

Score: 0

By rsx508

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 1:17 PM

Good bye and good riddance.

Score: 0

By DakotaSunRunner

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 12:16 PM

Netscape has been a most excellent browser, but when AOL took it over, it was quite inevitable that it would eventually go by the way side. I have very fond memories of Netscape and Netscape Gold and now it is all over. Good bye Netscape, you were the best in your time.

Score: 0

By Nerone

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 5:23 AM

Many web navigators prefer to have added safety, so they interface the web with a non-Microsoft product. Netscape was excellent for this. The AOL reborn Netscape had limited success and is now dead. But Mozilla is still alive and well as Seamonkey. Download from:
http://www.seamonkey-project.org/
and you will have the feeling of the original Netscape, with Navigator, Composer,Mail & Newsgroups. It is excellent!

Score: 0

By krgood

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 11:56 PM

Some of you may remember Arpanet, the true parent of the Internet as known today. Back in the 70's I worked on packet switching technology along with sequential packet delivery which is still in use today. In the early 90's, Mosaic was the first browser and was offered in one of the first dialup internet package called NetManage. Netscape followed shortly after that. Sad to see it go from a nastalgic point of view.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 2:37 AM

I missed all of that unfortunately. The first time I ever logged onto the internet was at a friends house on their ancient PC. I remember the dial up sound and it taking ten minutes to do anything, then seeing the animated Netscape logo. Their internet was so horribly slow I did not get to see anything though so it was not a very good first impression. I wouldn't log onto the internet again until years later in college and those computers were running IE 4 if I remember correctly.

Score: 0

By mdotwills

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:54 PM

Thank goodness the web is a more netscape-less place now!

Score: 0

By cranbers

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 7:26 PM

Good, perhaps now the can let those engineers work with Mozilla on their browser and they can get back on schedule with 3.0 release.

Why people would compete with and waste their time on something like Netscape, when its dead is beyond me. Mozilla however, based on the same technology and name is alive and well.

This is the same issue Linux has, if they would band together perhaps all the problems and issues linux faces could be solved and Microsoft would be forced to compete. Look at what Mozilla did for IE, they forced them to put out 7.0 or face further embarrassment.

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 8:15 PM

What problems and issues does Linux have? It certainly isn't nearly as bad as the many, many, many issues with Vista.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 1:58 PM

Funny.

You call on him to provide evidence of his claims against your OS of choice, and then proceed to make those same claims about another OS, providing the very same complete lack of evidence.

As I said, funny. You were always good for a laugh, man.

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 10:39 PM

Well for one thing, no money and a very small user base. Their problem is no one uses it. It works, for the most part better then any windows os. There is no virus or malware issues. It just works and if it doesn't have fun figuring it out.

Point is mozilla is a prime example that free software can be great and you can even make money from it. Google saved Mozilla, perhaps they can put out a Google linux distro or help them out by advertising, get more people interested especially on the desktop.

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 5:42 AM

So, you're saying that its only problem is popularity and not software related like with Vista? Vista drove me to Linux. More and more people are learning about Linux as a valid alternative now with companies, like Dell and HP, including it on many of their systems.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 9:17 AM

Linux = Vista? Only in the fanboy dream. I mean, just look at the learning curve. How many Joe Six Packs will able to run that thing. I have been using computer for 10+ years and have problem understanding it. Note that I am not a IT pro, however, I handle and troubleshoot enough computer problem myself. If someone like myself have problem understanding, imagine how much problem does those people who just want to doing every day stuffs with the computer.

Score: 0

By ZenWarrior

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 6:13 PM

Regardless the number of times it's repeated, Linux still isn't ready for the desktop. Only Linux fans think so. And yes, I use it exclusively on one of my computers. That's how I know it's not ready yet.

Score: 0

By Sven123456789

posted Jan 3, 2008 - 4:58 AM

Been fooling around with Linux on a backup pc. Tried a dozen versions like Ubuntu. Not bad, but even with programs like Wine, i couldn't get allot of the games i play to work and some business software also failed. So to me its not worth the change. As bad as windows has become (Vista is a disaster) its still the best choice around because of the amount of software that is compatible with it.

Score: 0

By sjc001

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 2:57 PM

I have 25 years experience with Microsoft's OSes (DOS to Vista) and I found this easier to use than Windows.

Linux myths dispelled.

http://www.esp.eweek.com...ux+Growth/220508_1.aspx

This distro is one of the most ready for primetime versions of Linux that I've tried so far. www.ubuntu.com This is what Dell and HP are putting on their Linux systems. It certainly needs far less maintenance (You don't even need to defrag it in ext3 format.) than Vista and it is far more stable and reliable than Vista as well.

BTW, even Wal-Mart is selling a PC with Linux on it instead of Windows now.

I've got news for you, even Windows is too much for most people. A computer is a toaster to them. Nothing more.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 2:04 PM

Try installing that on a SATA Raid on any nforce4 mainboard.

Oh, yeah...drivers, config files, mounting, fstab, the whole nine yards.

Fun!

Want to play the world most popular game (World of Warcraft)? Sure, install WINE, edit your config.wtf, edit the WINE registry and "enjoy" a really crappy experience with mouse buttons that aren't configured properly and a complete inability to maximize the graphics capabilities of the game. But hey, you make the windows jiggle like Jell-O.

Fun!

Yeah...this is ready for prime-time. I still have 7.10 installed on my IDE. I forced myself to use it as my sole OS for a month.

...after which I immediately switched back to Windows XP Pro 64bit on the SATA RAID and am *much* happier.

Score: 0

By ccfp1885

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 6:19 PM

well another good piece of history to the record books aohell did it agian not surprising though they have a way with making things disapear . Netscape Fairwell. Browser Hall of Fame Canidate.the question is now what are going to phuck up next that people like to use .

Score: 0

By darkzero63

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 11:09 PM

First Netscape, then hopefully the main company.

Score: 0

By The-One

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 3:27 PM

Well, I think too much credit was given to Netscape. I was in the arena when the internet was "born". Actually Mosaic was the first web browser, and it has long since deceased. Netscape had free betas for over a year and then Netscape charged money for the first version. It wasn't until Microsoft gave there's away for free that Netscape did too, and that was when masses had browsers installed(Netscape had a free trial download version).

So before knocking Microsoft, just remember Microsoft actually made the web happen a lot faster (how many people would have spent 20-50 bucks for a web browser? not many).

That being said, another pioneer bites the dust (actually this happened so long ago I doubt too may people will be shedding any tears).

Long live IE, Firefox, Opera, and .. umm..Safari LOL

Score: 0

By rotjong

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 5:09 PM

Funny that numerous people keep referring to Mosaic being first. I don't see anyone saying Netscape was first. Mosaic was indeed around first and Marc Andreessen was a Mosaic developer before founding Netscape Communications Corp.

Netscape accomplished something many other companies have not. They forced Microsoft to actually do something. IE was utter garbage compared to Netscape in the early days and Microsoft was forced to compete. They did their best but IMHO Microsoft never did crush Netscape as they would have liked. Most importantly, Microsoft never bought/acquired Netscape to use its technologies.

In the end, AOL caused the death of Netscape which comes as no shock to anyone. AOL is a graveyard. ICQ still is updated slowly and is all but dead. Winamp is being updated but for how long?

In the early days Netscape far outclassed Microsoft in the browser wars. Then Microsoft started to catch up and along with cutting a few corners they took the lead. Netscape faltered and then AOL took over and everyone knew what was going to happen from there.

I'll always have good memories of Netscape Navigator way back when. At least I have a Mozilla option to fall back on now.

Score: 0

By crashoverride

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 8:13 PM

"They did their best but IMHO Microsoft never did crush Netscape as they would have liked."

Indeed...Microsoft probably never imagined that Netscape would find new life as Firefox. Though the Netscape brand has finally fallen the code still lives on. However it is still my opinion, wrong as it may be, is that had Mozilla been allowed to carry on the Netscape brand it would not have died.

Score: 0

By rotjong

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 12:28 AM

"However it is still my opinion, wrong as it may be, is that had Mozilla been allowed to carry on the Netscape brand it would not have died."

That depends how you mean this. If you mean if they had allowed Mozilla to keep the name of Netscape from the beginning then I agree completely although it did take them a long time to release anything after the Mozilla Foundation was established. The change from the old Netscape Navigator/Communicator was also huge when compared to Mozilla's releases and Firefox. I think it was almost better to not use Netscape in the beginning.

If you mean that Netscape would live on now if AOL handed over the moniker... won't ever happen. AOL will ride Netscape as a name until they have squeezed ever penny out of it.

Netscape, IMHO, is absolutely meaningless as a name now and has been for years. It became a portal site and then even a Digg rip-off which failed and then back to a portal site. Netscape as an ISP?

Netscape Communications Corp actually meant something when it really existed. Now the name Netscape is a farse and people who never knew the original Netscape really have no idea what they missed.

The name Netscape has lost it's respect, power and integrity even if what it originally meant and was still may be respected by many who remember what it was while it is shrugged off by others.

What an utter shame.

Score: 0

By testman

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 8:26 AM

> Netscape as an ISP?

They were an ISP in the UK years back.

Score: 0

By darkzero63

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 11:09 PM

Why it hung on for as long as it did is anyone's guess.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 2:30 AM

Brand recognition. Same reason the Atari name is still around.

Score: 0

By Jegar48

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 9:12 PM

I was around for the 90s "Broswer Wars" and your "History" is skewed. Netscape was always free and the default browser for most people even with Mosaic in the mix. It was Micropsud's predatory marketing (initially refusing to allow it's "partners" to include Netscape as a an alternate browser on Windows machines) that drove Netscape to it's grave. If it hadn't been for Netscape I doubt if Internet Explorer would even exist in the form it does today.

Score: 0

By dlab21

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 11:22 AM

netscape was commerical software prior to the releases of ie, it did not come free.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 2:32 AM

I clearly remember seeing retail boxes of Netscape Navigator in stores. It was definately a commercial product at one time.

Score: 0

By GordieT

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 9:03 AM

I remember seeing it too. I believe it was put there to save the hours it would take to download it on dial-up. I also remember buying Redhat Linux from the store too. Same boat there, would have taken me forever on dial-up.

Score: 0

By rotjong

edited Dec 31, 2007 - 7:51 PM

I could be wrong here but my recollection of Netscape is the following:

You could download it for free but if you wanted Netscape Communicator along with essentials you could purchase a CD with everything on it. The cost was minimal. So, the browser, itself, was freeware.

Basically, it was no different than deciding whether to download a nix distro for free from the internet or ordering it directly and getting it on a CD/DVD for a small cost plus shipping.

Score: 0

By Banquo

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 3:17 PM

Well if you're nostalgic you can always just roll your own. Netscape Navigator 9 was really a port of Firefox 2, and since they are open source you could continue to build your own version with Netscape icons and the theme and call it Navigator. That's really all AOL did.
Of course it could only be for your own personal use; you couldn't distribute it because I'm sure the name is still copyrighted.

Netscape Navigator up to version 3 was THE browser, and it was good. IE at that time was a joke. When IE4 and Netscape 4 came out sites had started tailoring themselves to IE and it's proprietary non-standards, and instead of trying to solve these compatibility problems Netscape decided that adding more junk was the answer. So they released the bloated and still compatibility crippled Netscape Communicator, while IE4 was now being bundled into Windows and used by everyone because it was there. It was a combination of that and Netscape's bad decisions that killed it.

Oh and people who call products names like Nutscrape, M$, etc are childish fanboys and it makes you sound really foolish. Just wanted to throw that in.

Score: 0

By slinkys_delsol

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 2:31 PM

Hey, you have to Give Netscape (Not AOHELL) it's credit. It was the first on the Block and did well. Also when it hit in August of that year, if you have $1,000 of their Stock, by October you would have been a Millionaire...

Once earlier versions of IE and now Firefox came out, it just made it obsolete. AOHELL purchasing it more or less sank the ship to me.

It deserves to be the first inducted into the Browser Hall of Fame!

Score: 0

By The-One

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 3:28 PM

It wasn't first, Mosaic was, and it was free when Netscape charged money.

Score: 0

By DaveK

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 5:12 PM

If you're going to try and get technical on people, I'll point out that WorldWideWeb was technically the first web browser.

Score: 0

By slinkys_delsol

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 9:14 AM

Neither Mosaic or WorldWideWeb made any real impact, so even though "Time-wise" it was not the first, but it was the first Browser widely used and supported.

Score: 0

By patricioalba

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 12:36 PM

It was about time
http://www.spymac.com/details/?2321924

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:42 AM

Netscape was the best browser in the beginning. I used it until Netscape lost it's way with the release of 4.0.

From there on, it was all downhill. Extremely buggy code in the 4.x line resulted in dozens of .x releases to fix the bugs, but it didn't help. The software became big and bloated and never really recovered.

So indeed, RIP Netscape. You truly were the Elvis Presley of web browsers. To many you'll be the King of Browsers forever, but to the rest of us, you're a star that died as a fat, miserable waste of bandwidth.

(The memory is meant as tongue-in-cheek humor. Don't bother flaming me about your difference in opinions or inaccuracies in my analogy.)

Score: 0

By LordNikon

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 10:16 AM

"RIP Netscape. You truly were the Elvis Presley of web browsers. To many you'll be the King of Browsers forever, but to the rest of us, you're a star that died as a fat, miserable waste of bandwidth.
"
I actually think this is quite a good Statement.

RIP Navigator :'(

BTW I will remember the "Netscape Navigator" as the "KING of Browsers"

Score: 0

By xapaox

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 8:14 AM

browsing since 1995... back to that days Netscape was the number one and fight with ugly IE first versions was like a walk in the park...

I have really good memories with this browser (download my first mp3 for example =) )

Things chance with time uh?

bye bye good friend from old times...

Score: 0

By bolaris

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 7:19 AM

RIP

Score: 0

By Mystiqq

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 5:54 AM

I once used Netscape, briefly.

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 12:58 AM

meh, Netscape died a long time ago. It was a living corpse the moment AOL bought it in 1999. AOL should have just handed the Netscape brand off to Mozilla as part of the trademarks that were donated.

Score: 0

By mj132

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 7:58 AM

Well said.

Score: 0

By Hellcat_M

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 5:25 AM

Its sad that AOL can't get any talented programing staff. You'd think they would want to get the best not the worse around. Its almost like they hired everyone that graduated from DeVry or ITT Tech...lol

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:43 AM

You leave DeVry out of this, damn it! :P

ITT Tech, well... yeah, they suck.

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 12:57 AM

Yet another popular and successful piece of software of yesteryear that AOL destroyed. I said it before and I'll say it again. AOL is the Grim Reaper for software. AOL is where all good software go to die.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 1:06 AM

ICQ for one. Winamp, not so much... but it certainly has become quite the bloatware since acquisition.

Score: 0

By GS5

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 4:24 AM

Dude, don't get me started on ICQ. How anyone could have phucked up the most popular IM program that had absolutely no competition at the time is beyond me. Impossible as it may have been AOL found a way. I'm surprised that WinAmp is still around, it's still my favorite media player. But we are talking about AOL here, eventually they'll find a way to phuck that up too.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 1:00 PM

Glad to see someone else just as upset about ICQ. That was a sad day for me.

Score: 0

By tannman1

posted Jan 3, 2008 - 1:02 AM

Indeed, I remember ICQ being a awesome IM based in Isreal...I think I had like 5 numbers in my user number. AOL seems to ruin everythig it aquires. If I were a CEO I would do everything I could to avoid being aquired AOL. They see success and after they buy it they ruin it. My opnion isnt based on my dislike for AOL as an ISP (Hated it from it's beginning) but from watching many products and services they bought go downhill fast including ICQ, Netscape and Winamp. I stared in disbelief when they bought Time Warner. It's no wonder TW removed the AOL from it's official title. I would like to see AOL be forced to spin off some of the companies they got due to declining user base and reputation and then go the way as many of the companies they ruined...Gone for good

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 1:16 AM

True but most of the features that add to the bloat of Winamp are actually useful. Maybe not to all but they are useful.

Score: 0

By Marty_H

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 3:25 AM

And you can choose not to install a lot of those features. Fantastic.

Score: 0

By RobertM

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 12:34 AM

Just for clarification, I know this article doesn't exactly say that AOL "created" the Mozilla Foundation, but in case anyone is confused by what is included with the phrase "helped launch," here is a quote from Asa Dotzler, which he submitted for a Slashdot article about this same story:

"Mitchell Baker created the Mozilla Foundation, and as part of that endeavor she solicited donations from AOL and several other large companies. AOL was convinced to donate $2M over 2 years, a couple of trademarks, and some hardware. Other organizations also donated cash, equipment, bandwidth, and full-time staff to the early Mozilla Foundation. There's no doubt that AOL's donation was significant, but it can hardly be said that they created anything."
- Asa Dotzler,

If you haven't, you'll also want to read his blog about this topic: http://weblogs.mozillazi.../12/its_about_time.html

Score: 0

By internetworld7

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 12:00 AM

THIS IS FANTASTIC NEWS!

DIE NETSCAPE, DIE!!!

LIVE FIREFOX, LIVE!!!

LIVE ETERNALLY SAFARI, LIVE!!!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 2, 2008 - 1:50 PM

CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!!!11ONE1ELEVENTY1

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 2:14 AM

Netscape was based on Firefox dummy. :P

Score: 0

By Jegar48

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:16 PM

Who's the Dummy? Netscape preceded Firefox by about 10 years and was based on Mosaic.............

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 2:39 AM

The dummy comment was a joke, hence the :P

I was talking about Netscape 9 also, not the original. Should have been more specific I guess.

Score: 0

By internetworld7

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 7:46 PM

True, but they are TWO SEPARATE BROWSERS that share the same Gecko engine idiot. :P

Score: 0

By Banquo

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 12:56 AM

WRONG. Netscape 9 is based directly on the Firefox 2 source code, go ahead and load up some Firefox extensions in it, they work fine. Let's see you do that with other Gecko based browsers. Even on Netscapes own site look at the change logs, each new version coincides with new Firefox versions and implements the changes from Firefox. You should really make sure you're right before calling names. Here's a few pages you might want to read.

http://moz.sillydog.org/archives/netscape_9005.php

http://kylescove.com/fir...s-netscape-navigator-90/

http://mozillalinks.org/...etscape-9-available-now/

http://en.wikipedia.org/...gator_.28version_9.0.29

Score: 0

By internetworld7

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 1:52 AM

I don't know if you're addressing me or skydog but if you are addressing me, it was this prick who started with the name calling first and at the end of the day, FIREFOX AND NETSCAPE, THOUGH SHARING THE SAME CODE ARE TWO SEPARATE BROWSERS THAT HAVE TWO SEPARATE USER LICENSES, LOGOS, COPY RIGHTS, ETC.

Only a total and complete moron would argue that there are no differences between either browser and they are one and the same.

I'm done with this, I'll let you guys have the last word.

Score: 0

By yountmj

posted Dec 31, 2007 - 11:47 AM

"I don't know if you're addressing me or skydog but if you are addressing me..."

Well, seeing as how he replied to you...

Essentially, they are the same browser, as basically anyone can morph Firefox into what Netscape had eventually become. A few extensions and GUI changes, and voila.

Not much different from most (far too many) Linux distros that simply bundle different packages or graphical interface and consider themselves to be unique. If you dig deep enough, they're all the same.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 3:18 AM

Only a total and complete moron would argue that there are no differences between either browser and they are one and the same.

Uh, no one said that. I said Netscape 9 was based on Firefox 2 and you tried to say that it was not. Oh and I love how you backpeddled and admitted they do share the same code base but now your argument is they have different logos and copyrights. LMAO.

Score: 0

By Jegar48

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:20 PM

I love it. Netscape was based on what?

Score: 0

By 9h0s7

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:21 AM

really? that's funny, since netscape came first..?

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 3:02 PM

You're right but I didn't mean that. I was talking about the latest versions. Netscape Navigator 9 was actually Firefox with a new skin and some additional features. You could even use Firefox extensions with it. Netscape Navigator 8 was based on the Mozilla Suite (which is now Seamonkey). Of course the Mozilla Suite itself was from the open source release of Netscape Communicator, so we've really come full circle.

Score: 0

By internetworld7

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 7:54 PM

Dude, you are a stupid moron who doesn't know the first thing that you are talking about. THE ONLY THING IN COMMON THESE BROWSERS HAD WAS THEIR RENDERING ENGINE, GECKO.

Is Firefox 3 anything like Seamonkey, Netscape 9, Flock or any other Gecko based browser? Of course not idiot. They're functionality is different, similar but different. Get a clue loser and next time do your research before you start insulting someone and making your self look like a retard.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Dec 30, 2007 - 1:46 AM

"next time do your research before you start insulting someone and making your self look like a retard.

Sounds like you should have taken your own advice, but alas it's too late now. Navigator 9.0 was based directly on Firefox 2. It's not just a different browser using the same engine.

Oh and if you're going to keep typing in all caps and flaming people because of your own ignorance I recommend you go crawl back in your troll hole and fellate yourself with a sharp rock. Seriously, you're an idiot.

Score: 0

By internetworld7

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 2:05 AM

LOL, skydog as you can see moron, other people here are also pointing out how WRONG you are. Too bad your just too obtuse and inept to understand how WRONG you are.

I guess we know who the real IDIOT is? (^__^)

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 3:14 PM

Really, Who else is saying I'm wrong? Appears to me they are all saying you're wrong. Not to mention some nice links higher up in the thread to pages from Mozilla developers, wiki, and others that prove you're wrong. Nice try, be sure to pick up your gift basket at the door on your way out.

I guess we know who the real IDIOT is?

We certainly do. :D

Score: 0

By Banquo

edited Dec 30, 2007 - 12:58 AM

Netscape 9.0 is built on Firefox 2. You are the one that's wrong.

Score: 0

By morriscox

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 9:15 PM

Get a clue and actually read about the histories of these web browsers.

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Dec 29, 2007 - 1:19 AM

The only thing that impresses me about Safari is the speed. Other than that ______ ______

You get the picture....trying to come up with something else and it's just not happening.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

edited Dec 28, 2007 - 11:26 PM

It's strange that they wait until they finally release a good version to kill it. Navigator 9 was really nice. I guess that's why though; AOL is obviously allergic to good software. If they accidentally release a quality product they must immediately destroy it. The company thrives on crap, it's how they survived all these years.

Score: 0

By methuselah

edited Dec 29, 2007 - 2:13 PM

I think AOL's contract with Microsoft, to include IE in every version of the AOL software, played a large part in their actions in Netscape. They couldn't use Netscape for their main product at the time.
As to programmers, they did have some good ones. However, they were constrained by whatever they were told to do from on high. (and they had some terrible ones too.)

Once Time Warner got into the picture, the profits went to Time, and nothing got reinvested in AOL. (It's hard to imagine, but remember, AOL did have profits at that time.)

I agree they screwed up lots of stuff. And when they made the deal with MS about having AIM be compatible with MS messenger, the handwriting was on the wall. Anybody who didn't sell stock then was silly.

Someone asked if AOL is still relevant. One might put that in the same category as a question of, "Is MSN still relevant?"

AOL was an early investor in Google, so that might be AOL's largest plus at this point...if they didn't sell it.

Score: 0