On Mon, 2003-03-03 at 20:05, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The 03.03.03 at 13:46, David Robertson wrote:
Netscape 7 comes with its own java, installed in "/opt/netscape7/plugins/java2"
"Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition, Version 1.3.1"
My installation (which is to /usr/local/netscape) doesn't have "java2" in the plugins directory. I've got it working ok though by symlinking to the main java installation.
I think it was a download option. I downloaded "netscape-i686-pc-linux-gnu-sea.tar.gz" (44244K for version 7.0). As the mozilla that comes with Suse 8.1 doesn't work with Java, as known, I decided to install the complete Netscape as well, because I think it works better with some "official" sites that mozilla does.
In /opt/netscape I have version 4.8, installed from the SuSE CD - yes, there are sites that only work with this old version!
Yep - I can do my online banking with Communicator 4.7* but it just really sucks as a browser and falls over after a while. Netscape 7 (using their installer) definitely didn't come with Java (not even an option, though you can add it later) but maybe its included if you download the whole thing as a tarball as you did. David -- --
The 03.03.04 at 23:00, David Robertson wrote:
I think it was a download option. I downloaded "netscape-i686-pc-linux-gnu-sea.tar.gz" (44244K for version 7.0). As the mozilla that comes with Suse 8.1 doesn't work with Java, as known, I decided to install the complete Netscape as well, because I think it works better with some "official" sites that mozilla does.
In /opt/netscape I have version 4.8, installed from the SuSE CD - yes, there are sites that only work with this old version!
Yep - I can do my online banking with Communicator 4.7* but it just really sucks as a browser and falls over after a while.
True. I only use it because there are some sites that refuse to work with any netscape like 6 or 7 - don't even think of using mozilla or konkeror or whatever :-(
Netscape 7 (using their installer) definitely didn't come with Java (not even an option, though you can add it later) but maybe its included if you download the whole thing as a tarball as you did.
Could be. I went for the tarball - if I remember correctly - because an ftp download can be interrupted and resumed, but not an online install. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
True. I only use it because there are some sites that refuse to work with any netscape like 6 or 7 - don't even think of using mozilla or konkeror or whatever
Hey, if this is the case file a bug report over at bugzilla.mozilla.org. The Moz team is good about handling site compatibility issues and things of the sort, and with good reason. I've had a couple resolved myself for bugs I've submitted. -- John LeMay KC2KTH Senior Enterprise Consultant NJMC | http://www.njmc.com | Phone 732-557-4848 Specializing in Microsoft and Unix based solutions
* John LeMay (jlemay@njmc.com) [030304 18:07]: ->>True. I only use it because there are some sites that refuse to work with ->>any netscape like 6 or 7 - don't even think of using Mozilla or ->>konkeror or whatever -> ->Hey, if this is the case file a bug report over at bugzilla.mozilla.org. ->The Moz team is good about handling site compatibility issues and things ->of the sort, and with good reason. I've had a couple resolved myself for ->bugs I've submitted. Well, it's actually that 9.9995% of the time the people who make the site fail to test it with Mozilla or Netscape 6/7. It's not that it doesn't work. They figure if they get the often over quoted 95% of the "planet" that's using IE and they test it slightly with Netscape 4.x for the other perceived .0001% of the users then they are doing fine. This is one of the main reasons I am inflexible when it comes to this. I do not even think Konqueror should give the option to change the user agent string. I think that if users bitched to these institutions that they would have to change their policy. A good example of this shite behavior is Capital One. When you go to netscape.com you get pelted with ads for this lazy company but they refuse to let one use the newest version of Netscape. They even go so far as to post in their error page that Mozilla and Netscape 6/7 are not capable of doing SSL connections. When I called them about it and badgered them a bit they actually told me the truth. They had not tested anything accept Netscape 4.x and didn't actually know if their site would work ..it does BTW.. I changed the user agent sting for Mozilla to IE as a test and proved it worked. This was part of the reason they admitted their lazy behavior to me. They said they were going to test it and approve gecko based browsers but as of a month ago they haven't done a damn thing. The first time I called them on this was 19 months ago. I figured I would let my wallet do the talking, I recently transfered both of the balances on my Capital One cards to another single card and canceled the Capital One cards. They asked me for a reason. And I told them I didn't trust them as far as anything financial was concerned if they wanted me to use a 7 year old archaic browser and that they were to lazy to test something more modern. I would say instead of complaining to the Mozilla coders about their browser...I would complain to your financial institutions about their policies. Mozilla is a fully capable modern browser..some of these companies and their web developers are not. ;) /end rant -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org Tell me what you believe.. I'll tell you what you should see.
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 19:00, Ben Rosenberg wrote:
* John LeMay (jlemay@njmc.com) [030304 18:07]: ->>True. I only use it because there are some sites that refuse to work with ->>any netscape like 6 or 7 - don't even think of using Mozilla or ->>konkeror or whatever -> ->Hey, if this is the case file a bug report over at bugzilla.mozilla.org. ->The Moz team is good about handling site compatibility issues and things ->of the sort, and with good reason. I've had a couple resolved myself for ->bugs I've submitted.
Well, it's actually that 9.9995% of the time the people who make the site fail to test it with Mozilla or Netscape 6/7. It's not that it doesn't work. They figure if they get the often over quoted 95% of the "planet" that's using IE and they test it slightly with Netscape 4.x for the other perceived .0001% of the users then they are doing fine. This is one of the main reasons I am inflexible when it comes to this. I do not even think Konqueror should give the option to change the user agent string. I think that if users bitched to these institutions that they would have to change their policy. A good example of this shite behavior is Capital One. When you go to netscape.com you get pelted with ads for this lazy company but they refuse to let one use the newest version of Netscape. They even go so far as to post in their error page that Mozilla and Netscape 6/7 are not capable of doing SSL connections. When I called them about it and badgered them a bit they actually told me the truth. They had not tested anything accept Netscape 4.x and didn't actually know if their site would work ..it does BTW.. I changed the user agent sting for Mozilla to IE as a test and proved it worked. This was part of the reason they admitted their lazy behavior to me. They said they were going to test it and approve gecko based browsers but as of a month ago they haven't done a damn thing. The first time I called them on this was 19 months ago. I figured I would let my wallet do the talking, I recently transfered both of the balances on my Capital One cards to another single card and canceled the Capital One cards. They asked me for a reason. And I told them I didn't trust them as far as anything financial was concerned if they wanted me to use a 7 year old archaic browser and that they were to lazy to test something more modern.
I would say instead of complaining to the Mozilla coders about their browser...I would complain to your financial institutions about their policies. Mozilla is a fully capable modern browser..some of these companies and their web developers are not. ;)
/end rant -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org Tell me what you believe.. I'll tell you what you should see.
Unfortunately it seems that during the tech lay offs they fired the best people (as is usually the case) and kept the crap in too many cases :(. My brother had a similar issue with an UK education facility where it refused to work with anything but an old version of Netscape and it turned out they were testing non IE websites on a Mac running OS 7.6... I like to direct them to http://www.w3c.org always fun to do the HTML validator, especially on sites that claim to be "standards" based. Of course their idea of standards is somewhat based around IE... Just my opinion... Matt
On Wednesday 05 March 2003 04:00, Ben Rosenberg wrote:
Well, it's actually that 9.9995% of the time the people who make the site fail to test it with Mozilla or Netscape 6/7. It's not that it doesn't work. They figure if they get the often over quoted 95% of the "planet" that's using IE and they test it slightly with Netscape 4.x for the other perceived .0001% of the users then they are doing fine.
I think especially mozilla suffers from too many releases. Testing costs money, and especially banks don't want to use untested code (at least in theory, in practice it may be another story). Mozilla users are extremely loud in their demands, and often require support of even the latest beta version. Why netscape 6/7 isn't supported though is another question, and very puzzling to me.
This is one of the main reasons I am inflexible when it comes to this. I do not even think Konqueror should give the option to change the user agent string. I think that if users bitched to these institutions that they would have to change their policy.
I agree in principle, but in practice I need to pay my bills and doing it the old style by actually going to the bank is *very* expensive here (haven't done it in a while, but it's in the neighbourhood of $3/bill or more)
** Reply to message from Anders Johansson
This is one of the main reasons I am inflexible when it comes to this. I do not even think Konqueror should give the option to change the user agent string. I think that if users bitched to these institutions that they would have to change their policy.
I agree in principle, but in practice I need to pay my bills and doing it the old style by actually going to the bank is *very* expensive here (haven't done it in a while, but it's in the neighbourhood of $3/bill or more)
There are other reasons to use konqi's user agent .. Some sites , notably Some State ref/assessor sites that threaten to assign games and /or other required for "promotion" to higher grades ( American Soccer ) , even to hold up the chance of promotion to National referee, or Assesor if one doesn't use IE !! They Keep saying it's a "security" problem if one is able to use another browser.. ( yeah, I know it's idiotic, but it you haven't the clout to make them stop the practice , it becomes a "go along to get along" setup. ) However, konqi , w/ it's user agent string even tells them that the browser is from a linux desktop and it gets in okay.. So much for the sites "security reasons" <g> They just need some one to crack the site w/ IE ; AND have that published , to be made to open their site, at least to Netscape / mozilla. It's obvious to most non W32 users that it's either ignorance or idiocy ( or perhaps they are getting something for "free" from Redmonds dwarves <sigh> I guess that falls into the ignorance category ) <g> -- j Afterthought : The same people who laugh at fortune tellers take economists seriously.
** Reply to message from Ben Rosenberg
I would say instead of complaining to the Mozilla coders about their browser...I would complain to your financial institutions about their policies. Mozilla is a fully capable modern browser..some of these companies and their web developers are not. ;)
This I agree w/ entirely . complain to any Comercial Establishment loudly and often , if a resolution isn't made in a timely manner . change you bank, store etc. Especially change your CC balances.. since that is where they make most of their money from individuals customers. And if they aren't interested in your business , they probably aren't entirely interested in keeping your individual information ( CC and Bank Account numbers ) private either. "Just my Opinion America , I *could* be Wrong " ... Dennis Miller -- j Afterthought : Is a Jamaican terminal a raster-farian?
The 03.03.05 at 03:49, jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:
This I agree w/ entirely . complain to any Comercial Establishment loudly and often , if a resolution isn't made in a timely manner . change you bank, store etc.
I can't change my goverment... even voting takes years for changes to permeate. The funny thing is that one government agency required Netscape 4.x, and another required 6.x (with a technical explanation posted saying 4.x doesn't have a certain security feature). I'd like to put them both on the same room with lost keys till they agreed on updating :-) At least, they are thinking of Linux and Mac users, because some of their programs are now available as portable java things. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
The 03.03.04 at 21:04, John LeMay wrote:
True. I only use it because there are some sites that refuse to work with any netscape like 6 or 7 - don't even think of using mozilla or konkeror or whatever
Hey, if this is the case file a bug report over at bugzilla.mozilla.org. The Moz team is good about handling site compatibility issues and things of the sort, and with good reason. I've had a couple resolved myself for bugs I've submitted.
No, it is worse than that... it is the site maintainers that do not want to make the web page work with any other browser: they check the browser you are using, and if they don't like it, they refuse to serve the page. And I'm thinking of a goverment page here (http://www.cert.fnmt.es/???), which is used to obtain the certificate needed for submiting tax forms in Spain. The tax agency itself requires Netscape 6 or newer, but the certificate agency required a 4.7 netscape. Go figure! Fortunately, the certificate can be exported and used later. That was so last year, and till next year I will not need to renew. I don't know if the problem persists now. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson
participants (7)
-
Anders Johansson
-
Ben Rosenberg
-
Carlos E. R.
-
David Robertson
-
jfweber@bellsouth.net
-
John LeMay
-
Matt