| 1 |
I have no problems keeping it around, but renaming 4.x to either |
| 2 |
"netscape-communicator" or "netscape-navigator" for the actual |
| 3 |
executable binaries. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
You follow? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
By no means do I want to get rid of netscape 4.x (though I would like to |
| 8 |
see the project die a horrible death, the code is a mess, and it's older |
| 9 |
than hell.). I know it's one of the standards out there, but even |
| 10 |
netscape's customers are being pushed towards 6.x. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Avi Schwartz wrote: |
| 13 |
> No, no, no. Netscape 4.X is still very usefull for accessing web sites |
| 14 |
> which will not work properly with Netscape 6.X or Mozilla. Some of the |
| 15 |
> banks still do not consider Netscape 6.X/Mozilla as safe enough and the |
| 16 |
> only way for me to do web banking is using Netscape 4.X. Citibank is |
| 17 |
> one such example. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Avi |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 14:25, John Dee wrote: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>>One more question I've got. |
| 24 |
>>Would you guys be willing to replace netscape 4.x with netscape 6 as the |
| 25 |
>>default browser? |
| 26 |
>>Since netscape 4.x isn't really being maintained anymore (I do builds |
| 27 |
>>once a week, blah bleh), and the 6.x line is nscp's main focus, would |
| 28 |
>>you guys be willing to make netscape6 the default netscape browser? |
| 29 |
> |
Archives