Netscape 7.0 PR 1

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
well, it's out, it's tabbed, and it feels fast enough for a PR 1 + it's full featured, not as fast as chimera though - and the interface is as clunky as ever ... not a bad offering ...



Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    AOL money must be paying off. So long as it is full featured and renders pages properly with reasonable speed, I'd go for it. The tabs look very useful.



    Is it just me, or is Netscape staging something of a comeback after a couple of years of misery? 6.2 was, by all accounts, decent. And 7.0 seems set to close the gap with IE a bit.



    I think Multiple browser options are a good thing. Too many AOL users for web admins to discount Netscape. Should help keep standards as they should be: STANDARD.
  • Reply 2 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    One thing I haven?t seen other browsers implement, which I find very convenient in IE 5.1, is the ability to cache into RAM memory 3-4 pages that have been just rendered. So that when you decide to go back to these pages it doesn?t need to re-render them from scratch and they are instantly rendered.



    I use a RAM disk for faster browsing and I find IE5.1 still to be the most responsive browser available today on the Mac. I?ve tried all the other options (all are up to date versions), but IE is best in this regard as far as I can judge. I also find OmniWeb best in its ability to render correctly pages in other languages, which is kind of strange.





    mika.
  • Reply 3 of 10
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I opened up Netscape 7 and it had the Mozilla logo and all of my preferences from Mozilla were there. I guess they're pretty much the same.
  • Reply 4 of 10
    PC^KILLA - Mozilla has a RAM cache too.
  • Reply 5 of 10
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    It's a piece of ****. horrible even for a pr1 release.



    why can't we have one solid/fast web browser on the mac <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
  • Reply 6 of 10
    [quote]Originally posted by Dead Member:

    <strong>PC^KILLA - Mozilla has a RAM cache too.</strong><hr></blockquote>





    You?re right.



    But it seems to be very poorly implemented on the Netscape browser. On IE rendering cached pages takes less than a1/4 of a second. On Netscape this same process takes several seconds even for fairly simple pages. Although now Netscape does seem to be as fast as IE on the initial rendering of pages?



    mika.
  • Reply 7 of 10
    wolfeye155wolfeye155 Posts: 425member
    I downloaded it and after about 30 seconds of messing around in it, banished it from my harddrive. Netscape is very slow. If I didn't mind the speed so much, I'd use OmniWeb because while it's not as fast as some of the other browsers out there, it renders everything so beautifully. :cool:
  • Reply 8 of 10
    I wish I could just have the browser component of it... *sigh*
  • Reply 9 of 10
    roborobo Posts: 469member
    [quote]Originally posted by M3D Jack:

    <strong>I wish I could just have the browser component of it... *sigh*</strong><hr></blockquote>



    That there is called Chimera. chimera.mozdev.org
  • Reply 10 of 10
    kecksykecksy Posts: 1,002member
    Forget Netscape 7.0. I recently downloaded Mozilla 1.0 RC2. Great browser. VERY stable, fast, and fully featured (unlike Chimera which is so incomplete it isn't funny). I've switched completely from IE and have had no complaints. The interface is clean (using the "classic" theme), and all the pages I've visited so far have been rendered perfectly. Can't say the same for Omni Web or Chimera when I used them. Mozilla may not be the lightest or fastest browser out there (better than IE, but Chimera is a tad quicker), but it is by far the most compliant and feature complete. RC3 is available for download now at mozilla.org. Haven't tried it yet, but 139 bugs have been eliminated, so should be even better.
Sign In or Register to comment.