From: Philippe Verdy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu May 29 2003 - 11:51:20 EDT
Edward H Trager wrote:
> John Hudson wrote:
> > John Cowan wrote:
> > >Netscape 4.x is dead.
> > I wish it were. Monitoring the web traffic at one of the sites I'm involved
> > with, I am dismayed to see that more than 5% of visitors are using Netscape
> > 4.7.
> Lots of organizations may have reasons like these
> for sticking with older, arguably obsolete software like Netscape 4.x.
> With regard to Unicode/UTF-8 support, a legacy program like
> Netscape 4.x naturally has limitations.
I would prefer to say that Netscape 4.0 is dead, but Netscape 4.7x is not (I see no reason why users should continue to use versions before 4.7, as the 4.7 version fixed a lot of interoperability problems, including cross-platform compatibility with other Netscapes, plus many security fixes...)
Netscape 6+ is still too new with its new operating model, and lacks the level of optimizations that were present in Netscape 4.x when it was developed independantly of any regard to standard compliance, during the first stages of the MS/Netscape war on browsers.
Netscape 6+ is certainly a very recommanded upgrade for all users that just browse the web. There are still legitimate uses of Netscape 4.x for internal mission critical applications. But should these users be restricted to use it when just browsing the web our of these internal applications? There can exist two browsers on the same host (your internal application can still create custom shortcuts to start Netscape 4.x for the internal application only).
Did you consider also Opera in your evaluation of browsers ?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 29 2003 - 12:33:37 EDT