Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st Oct 2011 23:17 UTC, submitted by jello
Thread beginning with comment 493728
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Comment by Jennimc
by pandronic on Sat 22nd Oct 2011 14:31
in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Jennimc"
Not entirely true ... they went under partially because of Microsoft, but Netscape had a big fault too: their flagship product, Netscape 4, sucked. In those times I started my career as a webdeveloper and I remember that stuff mostly worked in IE while in Netscape it was a nightmare to get working. Tables were a mess, frames were a mess and don't get me started on the scripting and early CSS support (was there any?). The browser was slow and a big download for those times when you were lucky to have a 56kbps connection. As for standards, Netscape was also pushing theirs, which by the way were mostly rubbish.
I'm not saying MS was an angel, but Netscape fell to a combination of monopoly abuse from MS and a crappy product.
RE[8]: Comment by Jennimc
by unclefester on Sun 23rd Oct 2011 02:41
in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Jennimc"




Member since:
2011-06-17
NetScape mainly tanked because Microsoft pushed them out of the browser market, then used proprietary technology to push them out of the server market, where its bread and butter were.
The result being an innovation stagnation for more than a decade because for Microsoft, well, the Web was a threat for its Win32 monopoly.