[BladeRunner]

After seeing the odd thread pop up now saying that Netscape 6 doesn't work with this and Netscape 6 doesn't work with that, it's becomming clear that it's going to be simply easier to list what it does work with
Personally I found it worked best if I simply didn't download it.
Netscape promised so much with version 6 of their browser, looks like they failed and the superior browser will take up even more market share.

[CounterCW]

Netscape v6 works fine on my system... I'm running Win2K, 128MB RAM, Matrox G400. I don't know what other specs you want...

But anyways... be warned about Netscape... it's a memory hog. I was browsing with it here and there and found out it was using a lot (40+ MB) of memory. For the most part, it takes up about 25MB of memory... which, is still a LOT.
Other than the memory issue, Netscape 6 is a much improved browser of the 4.x versions. I think I will stick with IE though.

[Down8]

Quote:

Originally posted by BladeRunner:
[b]After seeing the odd thread pop up now saying that Netscape 6 doesn't work with this and Netscape 6 doesn't work with that, it's becomming clear that it's going to be simply easier to list what it does work with
Personally I found it worked best if I simply didn't download it.
Netscape promised so much with version 6 of their browser, looks like they failed and the superior browser will take up even more market share.

1) I have Flash and Shockwave [most of the time] working in Netscape [contrary to what Macromedia says]. Also QuickTime works fine, but takes up a lot of CPU [but that's just QT for you]. But, you said, it was "the odd post" that tells what NS6 doesn't work with.
2) I haven't been able to get WMP7 to work with it, but then again, why would MS care?
3) What did they promise that they haven't delivered on? Better web standards support? Got it. Speedy rendering? Got it. Multiple POP3 accoutns? Got it.
4) It is still a beta, as far as I'm concerned, and AOHell shouldn't have forced it out, but it will be the better browser [hopefully soon, maybe the 6.1 release].

I don't want grief and flames and such. I'm working on a more complete review that isn't swayed like all the ones I've read around the net. I'll post it here when I'm done, which won't be too soon, as I want a real and thurough report.

-bZj

PS: I've been using IE for the past year, and think it is a pretty damn good browser, so I'm not "just another Netscape fan".

[This message has been edited by Down8 (edited 17 November 2000).]

[Down8]

As for the memory usage:

That is standard for my system. PIII500E@667EB, 256MB RAM, Win2K Server.

-bZj

[This message has been edited by Down8 (edited 17 November 2000).]

[Gerbache Kaznet]

The memory usage on mine tends to hover around the 30-35 mark. Interestingly, it seems to stay there, though, regardless of how many windows I have open. Personally, NS6 is really growing on me, but then IE has quite a lot that really gets on my nerves. I just wish it didn't feel so beta-y..I manage to crash it WAY too much for a final product on win2k.

[jdulmage]

IE 5.5, hell 5.6 is better than NS6. They shouldn't have gave it to AOL, every damn window has something saying "buy this and that from netscape" and "such and such AOL"...it's like nothing but a window full of advertising. All I want is a browser, not a browser, e-mail checker, composer, etc. etc. etc. I mean, IE 6 looks nice by the screenshots, compared to NS6 as well. IE 5.5 seems to be perfect. I got one crash since May, and that was in when it was a beta in Millennium.

[This message has been edited by jdulmage (edited 19 November 2000).]

[Gerbache Kaznet]

I wouldn't mind Internet Explorer if it weren't for that dang Outlook Express mail program with it. I vastly prefer Netscape's email program.

With regard to the advertising, to be fair it only happens when you're on the netscape web page, but you're right, AOL should never have gotten involved with the project. Haven't both the Netscape programmers and the Mozilla project been saying for weeks that NS6 was not ready to be really released and that it's in beta quality right now. Hopefully we'll see a 6.1 soon that will fix the biggies, unless AOL screws that one up, too.

[Down8]

Yes, all the people at Mozilla were saying it's not ready. NS is AOL, so they were just trying to get it out the door this year.

As far as advertising goes: I have yet to see one bit of advertising on the borwser. Sure, there are link to the print center or what ever, but that's obviously a link to something, so where else would it go? Don't use it is you don't like it. And, this is the only bit of pseudo-advertising I can see.

-bZj

[loki]

man i've gotten mine to 30mbs. Also, Java isn't included with it, thats an 8mb download. With IE you get it in about 10mbs, with netscape you need about 13mbs. Here is my mem usage: http://loki.quadrent.net/netscape.jpg

[BladeRunner]

OK, OK.
Have Netscape at last sorted out the issue with a bad implimentation of Java and displaying valid HTML tags wrong?
Don't get me wrong, I'm very open to trying new things, software, OS's but Netscape doesn't have a great history since version 3.

[Down8]

Netscape has never done JavaScripting wrong. Netscape invented web-scripting. It was not fully compliant with DOM nor CSS [before NS6], so some calls made on these were not interpretted correctly.

-bZj