Comments on: Mint chip anyone?

Mint chip anyone?

bluno — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:00:04 -0800

Screenshots from the new Netscape release. (via waxy)

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:04:59 -0800

Firefox with the IE engine sounds pretty much ideal to me, actually. Thanks. And, um, does this mean AOL are actually finally going to package their OWN BROWSER with their ISP client?

By: timb

timb — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:09:03 -0800

so... ugly...

By: Dipsomaniac

Dipsomaniac — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:09:46 -0800

Ah, they've finally managed to package some of IE's security holes into an open-source browser. And Microsoft says that open-source can't compete.

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:12:01 -0800

I don't even have a clever analogy for how ugly that is. Maybe they could animate all the widgets and throw in some blinking lights along the top. And the menu bar goes at the upper right of the window since... when, exactly?

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:12:43 -0800

Jesus wept. Is there a single Windows application that's aesthetically pleasing? I mean, wow.

By: Faint of Butt

Faint of Butt — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:13:40 -0800

Too much computer and not enough typewriter.

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:15:33 -0800

Bear in mind that those screenshots are using the horrible Fisher-Price XP default look-and-feel, which anyone sensible turns off immediately.

By: LushMojo

LushMojo — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:16:44 -0800

To paraphrase Bill Macy in State and Main......it looks like Edith Head puked and that puke designed this browser.

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:18:28 -0800

In Wolfdog's shot, I'd say that getting rid of the fucking background dots and the fucking nuclear green colour (which I assume are options) would do wonders for the aesthetics. And having the menu in the title bar is a good idea. More space for the brower window, and you can always grab slightly to the right of the menu if you want.

By: selfnoise

selfnoise — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:21:20 -0800

Ze googles do nothing! Looks like it was designed by a depressed toddler.

By: tpl1212

tpl1212 — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:26:26 -0800

"The Netscape prototype is built upon Mozilla Firefox 0.9.3..." Why not Firefox 1.0? Weren't there some security issues with the pre-1.0 release? And yes. Those screenshots are ugly as unloved poo.

By: BradNelson

BradNelson — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 11:40:01 -0800

Nasty. So very, very nasty. I've always hated Netscape and it still bugs me that my parents use it religiously.

By: Sparx

Sparx — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:12:11 -0800

It reminds me of the /. interface for some reason. Go figure.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:12:30 -0800

Bear in mind that those screenshots are using the horrible Fisher-Price XP default look-and-feel, which anyone sensible turns off immediately. I don't have XP available to test this, but from the screenshots this does not look anything like XP's cartoon default theme. It looks much, much worse. It appears they're using their own custom-made ugly skin.

By: odinsdream

odinsdream — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:13:34 -0800

It reminds me of the kind of images people make when they first discover Photoshop filters. It looks like the developers just threw in everything they could possibly think of, and wrapped each individual item in a black border, shaded it, and added lense flare for good measure.

By: Phatbank

Phatbank — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:24:01 -0800

Hmm... doesn't have enough options, buttons, or contextual menu selections. I mean, I'm a fan of restrained, utilitarian interface design... but sheesh! j/k

By: squeak

squeak — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:30:40 -0800

I agree horrid horrid design though I do like the menu in the title bar as well but will I switch? nope :)

By: jefgodesky

jefgodesky — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:55:38 -0800

Wait, wait .... "based on Firefox, but with a twist - it includes support for switching to Microsoft's IE engine." What does that mean? They're going to replace my beautiful, standards-compliant Gecko with Microsoft's antiquated and hideously broken Trident engine? That's so wrong on so many levels. And just when Firefox's headway on the market share was giving me cause for hope, too. Why must you smash my dreams, bluno, why?

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 12:57:35 -0800

ugly as unloved poo I knew I'd recognize the right simile when I saw it.

By: breath

breath — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:08:17 -0800

Wait, there's loved poo?

By: Sticherbeast

Sticherbeast — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:18:27 -0800

/me looks up at a tattered painting of a poo in a bonnet with a single withered flower underneath the frame /me writes with a quill pen, "Oh, there was loved poo once. Once..."

By: angry modem

angry modem — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:26:30 -0800

I'm trying to figure out what the point of Netscape still existing is with Mozilla, Firefox, Camino, Safari, Toledo, Bunghole, etc.

By: obfusciatrist

obfusciatrist — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 13:42:54 -0800

Wait, there's loved poo? Ever been around an 18-month-old who has figured out how to take off his diaper?

By: mkultra

mkultra — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:00:56 -0800

They're going to have to invent some new awards to recognize just how awful that interface is. Ugh. They should be ashamed.

By: Fezboy!

Fezboy! — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:03:41 -0800

Hrm... It's Firefox with lots of crappy adware and plonky doodads. And you say you get an option for Trident too? Jesus wept.

By: Stan Chin

Stan Chin — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:13:21 -0800

They're going to have to invent some new awards to recognize just how awful that interface is. Wooo! Congrats Netscape!

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:31:12 -0800

On the bright side, at least they didn't give it a retarded name. That's got to count for something.

By: i_am_joe's_spleen

i_am_joe's_spleen — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 14:37:38 -0800

What a usability nightmare. It's fuzzy. The menus are on the right. The location/address box is IN BETWEEN THE BUTTONS!!! Never mind unloved poo. Hated, reviled, dysenteric poo, more like.

By: NewBornHippy

NewBornHippy — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:19:07 -0800

Firefox with the IE engine sounds pretty much ideal to me, actually. Thanks. You're being sarcastic, right?

By: Tlogmer

Tlogmer — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:45:44 -0800

They're going to replace my beautiful, standards-compliant Gecko with Microsoft's antiquated and hideously broken Trident engine? No no no -- it's just an option. You can switch between them. I'm a little pissed off for ideological reasons, but they're hardly replacing Gecko.

By: Pretty_Generic

Pretty_Generic — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:00:48 -0800

NewBornHippy - no. People are retards, and people retardedly make webpages that only work properly in IE. Frequently. I want to be able to view those webpages as the author intended, even though the authors are retards, because it just makes my life easier. It's pragmatic.

By: TimeFactor

TimeFactor — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:44:08 -0800

It has all the beauty of an AMC Pacer but with all the technological advances of a Chevy Vega engine.

By: euphorb

euphorb — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:49:24 -0800

On the bright side, at least they didn't give it a retarded name. said Space Coyote. Not that I disagree with you, but the logo is a flaming space fox. How cool is that?

By: NewBornHippy

NewBornHippy — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:23:56 -0800

It's pragmatic. Point taken. Here's my approach: I'm lobbying my company to drop support for IE and force our customoer to use mozilla. We're in the security business, and alloing configuration of security apparatus with IE is no good practice (even if in practicality, the risks are almost non existent.)