Why not Netscape?
Netscape is a very nice browser, and I use it daily. Still, whenever
possible I try to avoid netscape-dependencies in my pages for the following
So, that is the reason you will not see any frames, Java code or flashing
headers (brrr:-). Still, it should not matter, really, as I feel that it
is the content that counts....
Netscape is incorporating more and more proprietary technology in its browser
as well as its servers. This ranges from security features to support for
Adobe Acrobat. This, combined with the market share of netscape leads to
a virtual monopoly.
Adhering to standards
Netscape appears to go its own way more and more, ignoring the HTML standardization
process and inventing incompatible ways to do things. Again, their market
share leads towards monopoly. Also, but this is a bit philosophic, HTML
is a content-oriented standard and netscape HTML tends to be more
and more of a presentation-oriented standard. For a much better coverage
of this check the MIT "Why
not code for Netscape" page.
My main objection, as can be glanced from the previous points, is that
Netscape is moving towards a monopoly. This is a bad thing, in my opinion,
both from a social and a technical point. Social, because it will force
people to do business with Netscape; technical, because the lack of competition
will stiffle progress. Just look at MS-DOS: because of its market share
it has succeeded in virtually blocking any progress in operating systems
and user interfaces for more than 10 years.
Another problem with pages designed for Netscape is that they are often
impossible to interpret with other browsers. This is a problem because
there are still lots of people out there who cannot use Netscape even if
they wanted to. Netscape is not available on all platforms, and some people
simply have machines that lack the graphics capabilities or bandwidth to
Jack Jansen, Spunk Press, 10-Sep-96