Page 2 - Netscape 4.x?

I make my sites W3C compliant HTML 4.01 You'd think that seeing ugly sites all day will make people upgrade their browsers

I test with IE 5.0, IE 6.0 and NS 6.2. Sometimes I'll take a look with NS 4.7 and see if something goes really bad. But my sites work in NS 4.7 just that the layout doesn't look the way I want it to. I don't care about that as long as they can read and navigate my content I'm happy.

Let's face it who ever only uses NS 4.x doesn't know much about computers and as long as it "works" they won't care about your fancy look...

It's not worth developing a site to look as good on NS 4.x. Talking as a Graphic Arts manager here. The audience for the most part (big part like 90% or so) will be using IE 5.0+ or NS 6.0+ so why spend time (time=money) on something for such a small number of users while taking away special features that most of the people are used to using...

Just my 2 cents

I am Mac user/developer. I like using Netscape to browse better than IE. But I must agree that it is a bit touchy when it comes to developing. The good thing is that if you develop for Netscape 4.x, then it will work on almost any browser (lowest/lower common denominator).
To all those who develop for IE....I can tell that this is the case. It is very common to see a page that has missing bgcolor because the developer forgot to put a non-breaking space in table cell. I laugh when I see that mistake.
The one thing I like about IE is the use of IFRAMES. They look cool and function much better than frames.
The main thing I hate about IE: it is a product of Microslut...

Does anyone like testing old browsers?
Have you checked out URL
It is the king of all browser archives.

Cheers,
-a

I would say that it depends a little on whether you can afford to lose a small percentage of your customers. Since my stuff is mostly non-commercial, I chose to lose a few visitors and save myself headaches.

May I suggest that people read the following articles and the links you find there. This is what convinced me to just give up on NS4:

http://www.alistapart.com/stories/netscape/
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/

Also, check out Jakob Nielsen, Designing Web Usability, p. 33-35, on the rapidity with which browser versions are upgraded by users. It suggests that as the web becomes more generally used, upgrade rates slow dramatically. It took about 6 months for NS2 to kill NS1, about 10 months for NS3 to kill NS2, about 30 months for NS4 to kill NS3, and ... you get the idea. Unless people just stop designing for NS4, it will probably never die. I have some tech-savvy friends (like a biotech PhD) who didn't know until I told him a month ago that there were more recent browsers than NS4.7.

Cheers

Tom

I've been builing Web sites for almost 7 years now... For most of those years I was a loyal Netscape guy.

But the way AOhell/TimeWiner repays us is by breaking 75% of the code I've writtin specifically for Netscape browsers.

What they really need to do is to cut us some slack and make the damn JavaScript code backwards compatible so that my old code still works.

I don't have the 800+ hours it would require to go back and "update" all of this code! ... and who is to say they would not just break it again in a year?

That's completely wrong! Most of us using 4.x don't have a choice because AOL trapped us.

I have 4 very advanced Intranet Web applications at work that were built before IE even had 10% market share. They are all coded with NN-specific JavaScript.

The fact is I can't do my job without these Intranet sites, and they simply do not work on IE or NN 6.x.

I'll use NN 6.x the instant they make it backwards compatible with there own browsers. That's not asking for much. (I ought to be able to code something and expect it to last more than a couple years.)

Note this has nothing to do with "fancy looks" or even UI. This is a issue of simple functionality.

I think that the most important issue here is standards compliance.

NN4x isn't complaint with HTML 4.0, CSS-1, CSS-P, CSS-2, or ECMA-script.

IE v5.5 is - although there are still issues with the browser, and many of the JS extensions should be shunned or banned outright.

NN6.2 is also really darn close to being standards compliant...

Mozilla is probably doing the best job of following the 'rules' right now... of course, that says nothing for market share.

As a developer, I really try to keep my code w/in the boundaries set by w3c.

Two things need to happen in the world of web development to make everyone's lives a lot better:
1.) Browser manufacturers need to make their browsers standards compliant - and not create odd extensions
2.) Web developers need to make their code standards compliant - and not use extensions to the standards.

So, along these lines, my feeling is that web developers should either 1.) not program for browsers that don't at least meet the bare minimum of w3c compliance, and 2.) not use vendor-specific extensions in their code.

Personally, I'm sick of writing custom API's so my DHTML runs in various flavors of Netscape and MSIE. The burden of functionality really should be on the manufacturers, not the programmers and certainly not the users.

Can you imagine a world where your code ran the same in every browser?

i say use mozilla.
version 0.9.9 is out now

Yeah... That's a lot easier to do in 2002 than it was in 1996 since there were no browsers that even came close to supporting the HTML standards and there were NO standards for javascript-like scripting.

And Netscape looked like the clear leader at the time.

too bad... i just anaylzed server logs for a customer today, and it seems like more than 10% of their users (B2B, germany) still use NN4. At least it´s mostly the 4.5+ versions, but there also was some 4.05 (a really ****ty one that i owe a lot of work already to).
... and then i spent the rest of the day updating (downgrading???) their web-pages

i did not do any layers for a long time. is (was) this really the only way to do DHTML in NN4?!?!?!

seems like they are just too lazy to update (since it still works most of the time... why?)

hell, we should make a netscape-virus (like the ie ones) and just wipe them all from their harddisks... har har har ... hope they won´t get the installation files for 4.X!

(going to bed frustratedly since i know i have to spend another few days on this s***)

Netscape 4 should be quartered, burnt, the ashes strewed into a star that's about to become a supernova, the future supernova thrown into a BIG black hole. The only thing we would have to worry about would be retaliation from the other side

The only way to really get rid of old browsers is to get rid of old Mac's and PC's.

When the Internet came along that was the impetus for lots of folks to upgrade their 486's for Pentiums, and their Mac Quadras for Power PC's. The problem is that a ton of those original Pentium I's and Power PC 601's are still being used by folks.

We need to come up with something so cool that these folks will want to upgrade to PIV's an G4's.

...In the meantime a bunch of geeks with screaming machinges voting Netscape 4.x off the island won't actually make it happen in real life.

There is another way to rid ourselves forever of the scourge of vintage browsers.

We must all simultaneously cease all coding for vintage browsers.

We must only program web pages that are compliant with standards-compliant browsers - and that means MSIE 6 (Win), MSIE 5.1 (Mac), Mozilla .99, Opera (5 or 6, depending on OS), and Konqueror (there may be others, my apologies if I'm omitting anyone here).

We must also provide non-compliant browser users with information on where they can get an upgrade, when our complaint pages fail to load properly in their browsers.


The real key here is that all web programmers must be committed to coding only with standards... its all or none. If we really want to be rid of N4.x now, and not in another 3 or 4 years, we have to team up.

I'm in - anyone else?

I forgot this post still existed... in fact I thought it was archived

Well anyway, I've taken to building sites that work in the following browsers: IE5.x+ , NS6.x+ , Mozilla and Opera 5.x.x+ . I decided to start using the technologies that are current and gave up on anything older than 5/6 or lacks support for the current W3C spec's.

NN4.x is NOT standards compliant and neither is IE (up until 6, but even then there are a few proprietory tags and JS additions that aren't either), Opera and Mozilla in my own opinion are the only real front runners in the Standards Compliance race. BTW, nn4.x only loosely supports HTML3.2 and JavaScript 1.1 standards... I mean real loosely and IE1, IE2, IE3, NN2 and NN3 don't even register on most browser stats I have looked at. Useful Link: http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey.../browser_chart/

As for the guy yabberin on about his intranet that isn't IE or NS6 compatible, well thats your problem. Maybe it's time that you rebuilt them and got with technology, thats just my opinion. I know that it sure as hell don't look great to clients when you try and sell an intranet / site that isn't up to todays standards. Who knows you may get a dramatic speed increase, more efficiency, improve moral among employee's and get a whole new set of clients. A-O-Hell isn't my pick either, but it is a lame excuse to say that they trapped you, after all you CAN choose to stay "trapped" or choose to move on, full-stop.

As for lynx... I am not even going to bother.

As for braile and TTV (text-to-voice) devices... I am not an expert in this area, but I do believe that O/S and hardware specific drivers handle these devices, not the browser they use. Just make sure you use ALT tags on your images and have a Site Map if possible.

Also make sure you include General, Privacy and Cookie policies if you live in AU or a country that has extremely strict Privacy laws. I believe that it is the law now to include these in AU, which sucks. Useful link (for AU designers): http://www.iia.net.au/

I have read most of Jakob Neilsons book "Designing Web Usability" as well (I got bored and put it aside), most (but not all) of what he has said is just good ol' common sense. I agree with a lot of what he has said in that book (with a few exceptions).

I also agree that the client is king and it is our job as designers / developers / project managers to be flexible to the needs and wants of them. But, I also believe that it is up to us as designers / developers / project managers to inform them of possible area's where they're product may break in their suggestions and to inform them of the current technologies, trends and new laws.

Well anyway... keep debating... I am enjoying this, I didn't expect this thread to keep going.