Netscape 8 'breaks' IE

[craigsboyd]

ZDNet Article: Netscape 8 'breaks' IE

What are the perceived ethical responsibilities of Netscape and MS to their consumers? What are your thoughts about Netscape releasing a product that breaks IE and your thoughts regarding MS telling it's consumers to uninstall their competitors product?

http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com

 

[EBGreen]

While I generally tend to be mildly anti microsoft, I'd say that Netscape is in the wrong on this one and judging by their response, they know it.

[red]"... isn't sanity really just a one trick pony anyway?! I mean, all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you are good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit!" - The Tick[/red]

 

[porkchopexpress]

Here we go again browser wars 2 the revenge. I have to agree Netscape have fluffed up here this is not the sort of publicity that they need at the moment.

 

[SantaMufasa]

One piece of software breaking another piece of software...Hmmmm...how is that any different from any other virus or worm? Should be some liability in there somewhere.

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)

http://www.dasages.com

Do you use Oracle and live or work in Utah, USA?
Then click here to join Utah Oracle Users Group on Tek-Tips.

 

[edfair]

After the M$ history of breaking things I would normally write it off as "turnabout is fair play". But it isn't really. I would hope that it was accidental but the really hilarious cause would be if it was because M$ used some undocumented feature in their IE or if Netscape used a documented entry that M$ had silently changed without notification.

Ed Fair
Give the wrong symptoms, get the wrong solutions.

 

[Dimandja]

>While I generally tend to be mildly anti microsoft, I'd say that Netscape is in the wrong on this one and judging by their response, they know it.

To be fair, this "Netscape" has nothing to do with the Netscape of yore. This browser called Netscape 8 was glued together by AOL, who had bought the name. To find some of the original Netscape, go to Firefox.

Having the above facts in hand, follow the history of AOL, and all becomes clear.

 

[EBGreen]

I am aware that the true development of the original Netscape is being done by the Firefoc/Mozilla team, but regardless, it is the installation of the Netscape browser that causes the problem.

[red]"... isn't sanity really just a one trick pony anyway?! I mean, all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you are good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit!" - The Tick[/red]

 

[Dimandja]

As I said before, the "Netscape browser" you talk of is not made by the Netscape folks. AOL hired a collage of programmers who have nothing to do with the original Netscape, to code that monstrosity. AOL then bought the name "Netscape" and slapped it on that package.

True, blame "the installation of the Netscape browser". All I'm doing is clarifying who is really behind that fiasco.

 

[craigsboyd]

Having the above facts in hand, follow the history of AOL, and all becomes clear.

Are you implying that AOL is in bed with Microsoft and bobbled this entire thing on purpose? The old rumor that AOL bought Netscape in the first place as MS a favor somehow? This would have ethical implications, but I'm not sure this is what you meant. This stance brings up a host of questions regarding its validity... why did AOL do right by Mozilla in so many ways if this was the case?

OR

Are you implying that AOL has shown a great deal of ineptitude in this, as they have in many past ventures?

http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com

 

[Dimandja]

>Are you implying that AOL is in bed with Microsoft and bobbled this entire thing on purpose?

You got it all wrong. I din't say anything of the sort.

Let me ease you into the history of AOL (nothing to do with MS, mind you).

The heavy handed practices of AOL are legendary. For example, when you signed up for their "trial" internet, it was very difficult to get out of their contract. Once they want something (your wallet, for example), they would put a solid grip on it.

In light of that, their apparent tactics in securing a browser niche with "Netscape" 8 is completely in line with AOL previous behavior.

I hope I clarified this. Please don't read what is not there. Again, no Microsoft appears in my post.

 

[craigsboyd]

Dimandja,

You come across a bit harsh in your reply, I'm sorry if my post offended you.

I wasn't presuming to tell you what you said. I was asking for clarification because I found your post above interesting, but was pretty sure that I didn't fully understand the implications of your last statement in it. Specifically, what part of AOL's history you were referring to and how that related to their latest moves regarding Netscape 8. The only thing I could relate it to was other things I had heard through the years about AOL, but rather than blindly read on of these into your post as the intended meaning, I thought it better to ask.

I still don't understand how coming out with Netscape 8 (or perhaps the breaking of IE) relates to putting a solid grip on the consumers wallets. I feel I am still missing some significance here that has lead you to your conclusion. Could you further ease me into AOL history by explaining?

http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com

 

[Dimandja]

>I still don't understand how coming out with Netscape 8 (or perhaps the breaking of IE) relates to putting a solid grip on the consumers wallets. I feel I am still missing some significance here that has lead you to your conclusion. Could you further ease me into AOL history by explaining?

1. AOL has a history of utterly ignoring ethics.
2. Netscape 8 ignores ethics.

3. Netscape 8 is not the same product we used to know as Netscape. Because Netscape 8 was written by people whom AOL hired, and those people have no connection whatsoever with the original Netscape writers. Their loyalty lies with AOL only.

4. Previous posts are comparing this spat (Netscape 8 vs IE) to previous wars between browsers of the same name.
5. Point 4 is wrong because the browser called "Netscape 8" is a concoction of AOL, and AOL only. They happened to have bought the name "Netscape" to brand this browser.

I couldn't be more clear than this, I'm afraid.

 

[edfair]

Although my previous post indicated that turnabout was possibly fair play it was not an indication of previous browser wars, more a comment on Microsoft's history of breaking things. Or of changing entry points, or of using undocumented entry points, or any of many other things that go bump in the night.
What had always been curious to me, up until XPSR2 was why they never seemed to break anything of their's.

Ed Fair
Give the wrong symptoms, get the wrong solutions.

 

[craigsboyd]

Dimandja,

OK, thanks for that. I understand where you were coming from now, and what you meant by your earlier comment regarding AOL's history. Sometimes it just takes me a little bit to understand something that has been said... I respect your opinion and appreciate the information you've added to this thread as well as your patience.

http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com

 

[ChrisHunt]

I tend to suspect cock-up over conspiracy in most cases. This looks like an accidental incompatibility between two pieces of software to me - no ethical considerations apply.

Maybe if we had some facts to go on, instead of just a bug report, we'd be in position to form a useful judgement. Otherwise it's just a matter of whether you dislike M$ more or less than you dislike AOL.

The best thing to do is probably to call down a plague on both their houses and Get Firefox!

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[Dimandja]

>I tend to suspect cock-up over conspiracy in most cases.

I initially thought so too. Until I did some research on the subject. Get this: IE chokes because Netscape 8 changes a registry entry that belongs to IE!

How can a program accidentally modify another program's registry entry?

Big booboo.

 

[SantaMufasa]

Dimandja, I agree...accidentally modifying someone else's registry entry is like accidentally using someone else's debit card.

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)

http://www.dasages.com

Do you use Oracle and live or work in Utah, USA?
Then click here to join Utah Oracle Users Group on Tek-Tips.

 

[Diancecht]

Maybe we, or at least I, lack more information about what's going in there to blame one or the other.

I have to agree that is very difficult to change a registry key by accident. If so, it's almost negligent.

But in this case, we have some more considerations. If Netscape wants to have any chance against IE, I think they should try to get some level of integration with the Windows OS. Since IE *is part* of Windows OS (remember all the legal processes about this and discussions about it was firmware or software), Netscape would want to change some setting so they become low-level integrated with OS.

But that does not clarify the ethical thingie. Maybe they just made a mistake on that process, barfing IE keys, or maybe they intentionally modified that.

Anyway, I think this is not a good thing for Netscape. Most IE users will get scared if it breaks with a new software they haven't even tried.

Another discussion would be if that registry key is a pure IE one or just a Windows Explorer one. In the second case, the mistake (if it was) would be a bit more justified.

Cheers,

Dian

 

[ToniL]

[whining] Yeah, well they started it!!! [/whining] Micro$oft breaks a lot of stuff, too, #1 being people's bank accounts... I see this as just another reason to go to Mozilla...

Peace,
Toni L.

Windows reigns within.
Reflect, repent, and reboot.
Order shall return.

 

[DrJavaJoe]

You can't go to Mozilla.

You must join the collective.

YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED.


Two strings walk into a bar. The first string says to the bartender: 'Bartender, I'll have a beer. u.5n$x5t?*&4ru!2[sACC~ErJ'. The second string says: 'Pardon my friend, he isn't NULL terminated'.