quirks these days. NN 4.x was such hot garbage to work with.ã Tr> PF> I'm running SeaMonkey on the BBS now, feels akin to Netscape Communicã Tr> PF> 4.x bit with a modern rendering engine.ã Tr> Yeah, it was the rendering that was the biggest issue... was writingã Tr> web-ui charting and literally had to cover the entire screen when doingã Tr> so, or it would send someone into a seizure with the flickering. IIRCã Tr> NN4.07 was required support for the company I was at around 1999 or so,ã Tr> as Novel was a major client and it was their "standard" browserã Tr> internally. ããI think the moment when Netscape was rewritten into Java killed the adoption completely. It was NN6 if I recall. Looked fancy from UI/UX perspective as we call it today, but slow as hell and unbearable for daily use comparing to sleek IE integrated with the OS.ããThat was also one of the reasons for fanboyism and complaints against MSFT that there is no way browser can be so fast unless put into lower levels of the OS, which was unfair. But I believe NN fucked up implementation and choosing Java as front-end was way premature by the end of 90s.ãã-h1ãã... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a copy.ã
i used netscape and i don't even remember that happening. i looked it upã MR> and it said it was using the gecko engine.ããTHen perhaps memory plays tricks with me. it somehow resonates with me that six (that with aqua blue ui and big six in the background layer of the welcome web page it was starting with, I think animated as well) was implemented in java or strongly integrated with java.ããRegardless, it was slow beyond acceptance on my computer at that timeãã MR> MR> i think people ditchedãnutscrape long before 6 if that really happened.ããI liked it up to 4, for sure. It was my browser on early linux and win 3.11/32. My early Internet access memories is Netscape and MIRC :>ãã-h1ãã... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a copy.ã
I used Netscape for a long time as well, and I don't remember hearingã Ni> about it being ported to Java. And with that version of Netscape, Iã Ni> don't recall needing to install the Java runtime to use it.ããYeah.. I keep searching for some reference, but it seems that my mind's boggled. Apologies for confusion. But still I remember it was slow like hell, that sticks.ãã-h1ãã... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a copy.ã
hollowone wrote to Nightfox <=-ãã Ni> I used Netscape for a long time as well, and I don't remember hearingã Ni> about it being ported to Java. And with that version of Netscape, Iã Ni> don't recall needing to install the Java runtime to use it.ãã ho> Yeah.. I keep searching for some reference, but it seems that my mind'sã ho> boggled. Apologies for confusion. But still I remember it was slow likeã ho> hell, that sticks.ããI don't think it was ported to Java, but Netscape devceloped Javascriptã(no relation) to extend what was mostly static web sites way back when.ãããã... IN CASE OF EMERGENCY DIAL 0118 999 881 999 119 725 3ã--- MultiMail/Win v0.52ã þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.ã
Tracker1 wrote to hollowone <=-ãã Tr> To be clear, Java isn't JavaScript. The JS UI was started with NN6ã Tr> using an XML UI templating language called XUL. Riff on Ghostbusters,ã Tr> "There is no data. There is only XUL!"ãã Tr> XUL itself had a lot of really cool features, and by 2002 most PCs wereã Tr> more than fast enough. There was a standalone Application toolkitã Tr> called XULRunner and quite few third party apps used it... Mozilla kindã Tr> of left it to die though, and eventually nuked XUL support and left itã Tr> to die. It was pretty much Electron a decade and a half beforeã Tr> Electron existed.ãã Tr> They also added JS support for E4X (ecmascript for xml), the only otherã Tr> implementation was in ActionScript 3 for Flash/Flex.ããThis is bringing up bad memories of HotJava, the java browser forãSolaris.ããããã... What does this mean?ã--- MultiMail/Win v0.52ã þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.ã
But I believe NN fucked up implementation and choosing Java as ã Tr> ho> front-end was way premature by the end of 90s.ã Tr> ã Tr> To be clear, Java isn't JavaScript. The JS UI was started with NN6ã Tr> using an XML UI templating language called XUL. Riff on Ghostbusters,ã Tr> "There is no data. There is only XUL!"ããI knew the bell wasn't ringing far from truth. Thanks for pointing me to the right waters. I'd not mistake java with javascript, perhaps my memory resonated with the wrong echo from the beginning.ããI know XUL, it was pitched by Mozilla years after NN collapsed as something that may help Javascript conquer desktop app development. It never resonated though.ããBut that makes sense to me, if XUL predecessor as Wikipedia claims developed initially by Netscape Communications in around 1997 was responsible for NN6 rendering and I experienced it around 1999/2000 with my Celeron 300Mhz, no brainer it was slow as hell.ããNow I even found right reference regarding this XUL thing to impact performance on slower machine at the time of NN6 release.ããMystery solved.ãã-h1 ãã... Xerox Alto was the thing. Anything after we use is just a copy.ã
Sysop: | Karloch |
---|---|
Location: | Madrid, Spain |
Users: | 59 |
Nodes: | 8 (1 / 7) |
Uptime: | 142:25:31 |
Calls: | 717 |
Calls today: | 3 |
Files: | 17,895 |
Messages: | 65,814 |