<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New Netscape browser screenshots</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/</link>
	<description>You've got your good thing, and I've got mine</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:16:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Geoff</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-337</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-337</guid>
		<description>Heh, well sorta related..  believe the new Netscape will use the Firefox UI framework and rendering engine (Gecko).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heh, well sorta related..  believe the new Netscape will use the Firefox UI framework and rendering engine (Gecko).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-336</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-336</guid>
		<description>Nevermind, different subject :-(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nevermind, different subject :-(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-334</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2004 09:27:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-334</guid>
		<description>So I am finally a Firefox believer,
I tried it a year ago, and did'nt like it. Today I had to print out a USPS label from paypal from my iBook, well safari failed (which I am fond of), and IE failed as well, much to my suprize, but Firefox did it! Now to find a skin that makes it look like safari........</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So I am finally a Firefox believer,<br />
I tried it a year ago, and did&#8217;nt like it. Today I had to print out a USPS label from paypal from my iBook, well safari failed (which I am fond of), and IE failed as well, much to my suprize, but Firefox did it! Now to find a skin that makes it look like safari&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-301</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:47:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-301</guid>
		<description>I suppose it sounds useful, but how maybe people do you know who aren't web developers who understand even what a 'rendering engine' is?

I just don't think it will be used &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; by probably 99% of the people that use the browser. It also makes me wonder what else switches when you change that preference: does it change 100% of things like javascript and DOM behavior, or just the page layouts? It seems like this would just cause more headache than it's worth.

There's also the argument that if we want these "Web Standards" that everyone is hyping to take off, we should get new browsers that support that and stop coddling the old broken pages that &lt;em&gt;require&lt;/em&gt; Internet Explorer or other outdated browsers (At a past job we actually had some apps that &lt;em&gt;required&lt;/em&gt; Netscape 4, it was ridiculous).

p.s. Happy birthday, Mike :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose it sounds useful, but how maybe people do you know who aren&#8217;t web developers who understand even what a &#8216;rendering engine&#8217; is?</p>
<p>I just don&#8217;t think it will be used <em>at all</em> by probably 99% of the people that use the browser. It also makes me wonder what else switches when you change that preference: does it change 100% of things like javascript and DOM behavior, or just the page layouts? It seems like this would just cause more headache than it&#8217;s worth.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s also the argument that if we want these &#8220;Web Standards&#8221; that everyone is hyping to take off, we should get new browsers that support that and stop coddling the old broken pages that <em>require</em> Internet Explorer or other outdated browsers (At a past job we actually had some apps that <em>required</em> Netscape 4, it was ridiculous).</p>
<p>p.s. Happy birthday, Mike :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike D.</title>
		<link>http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-300</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike D.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.deconcept.com/2004/12/01/new-netscape-browser-screenshots/#comment-300</guid>
		<description>I actually like the strategy quite a bit as it illustrates something I wrote about a few weeks ago with regards to separating out rendering engines from browser interfaces.  The idea with the AOL browser ("Netscape") is simple: Let users download it and have it default to "Netscape Mode" (which is basically just using Firefox's rendering engine).  Should users come to a site that requires them to use Internet Explorer, they can switch over to the IE rendering engine with one click.

With fewer and fewer sites being IE-only these days, most people would thankfully never have to use this option, but it's nice to know it's there if you need it.  Hoisting the IE engine in Windows is not a very processor-intense or memory-intense thing to do since it's already pretty much loaded anyway, so this was most likely not a monumental effort for the Netscape dev team.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually like the strategy quite a bit as it illustrates something I wrote about a few weeks ago with regards to separating out rendering engines from browser interfaces.  The idea with the AOL browser (&#8221;Netscape&#8221;) is simple: Let users download it and have it default to &#8220;Netscape Mode&#8221; (which is basically just using Firefox&#8217;s rendering engine).  Should users come to a site that requires them to use Internet Explorer, they can switch over to the IE rendering engine with one click.</p>
<p>With fewer and fewer sites being IE-only these days, most people would thankfully never have to use this option, but it&#8217;s nice to know it&#8217;s there if you need it.  Hoisting the IE engine in Windows is not a very processor-intense or memory-intense thing to do since it&#8217;s already pretty much loaded anyway, so this was most likely not a monumental effort for the Netscape dev team.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
