[CLUE-Talk] Review of Netcape 6 for Linux
Jim Intriglia
jimintriglia at hotmail.com
Thu Nov 30 21:57:32 MST 2000
Match-
Good information - I had read about the debug code causing a slowdown in web
page loading/rendering performance with respect to V4.7x, but forgot about
that.
A few reviewers were pretty hard on the NS 6 release for the Enterprise
because of no LDAP support. Beleive that is more of an issue to M$ shops as
opposed to Unix shops, but I could be mistaken (LDAP supported by Novell,
too).
Hopefully the pluggable JVM will work as intended, and they can get the SSL
fix released in the next month or so (pleeease).
JimI.
----Original Message Follows----
From: Match Grun <match at dimensional.com>
Reply-To: clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us
To: clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us
Subject: Re: [CLUE-Talk] Review of Netcape 6 for Linux
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:03:01 -0700
John,
Just remember that both Netscape 6 and Mozilla M18 are both beta.
They have been built with debug turned on; this will cause a
performance degradation. If you start them from a terminal window,
you will see many messages scroll by. This also affects performance.
However, having said that, the Galeon web browser, which uses the
same Gecko rendering engine that Mozilla uses, performs a lot faster.
The reason for this, is there is a lot less eye candy in the application.
I have been busy evaluating Mozilla M18 for several weeks now. I have
tried Netscape 6. However, I prefer Mozilla since all the Netscape
add-ons have been removed. With earlier builds, I found that Mozilla
is more stable than Netscape. Since I use Gabber, which has a gateway
to AIM, there is no need to use the Netscape IM application.
Since I have been using Netscape 4.7 to read mail, I have been
evaluating Mozilla M18 since it is supposed to handle multiple POP
and IMAP mail boxes. So far, with the latest build, I have not found
any serious problems with handling mail to 3 different EMail accounts.
I like HTML mail formats, however, there are not many mail clients that
handle HTML correctly. Netscape and Mozilla handle both.
Here is a brief summary of various browsers:
Mozilla M18/Netscape 6:
------------------
No support for HTTPS. Visit http://www.1stbank.com, click on Login
icon.
Galeon:
------
Faster than Mozilla. No support for HTTPS.
Konqueror:
--------
Very fast. Does provide support for HTTPS. However, there are
problems with the javascript. Visit http://www.1stbank.com, click on
Login icon. The page will not render the login form because of
javascript problems.
Opera:
-----
Very fast. Has support for HTTPS and Javascript. Java applets
are not currently implemented. Like the Windoze version, this is
not free.
You will definitely need to keep Netscape around unless you are
planning on using Opera. However, if you are planning on using
HTML mail, only Netscape, Mozilla and KMail support HTML
correctly. I have tried Evolution (from Eazel); this renders text
but not the pictures.
Match
John Kottal wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Just so I wouldn't put my foot in my mouth, I decided to quantify my
> testing, and here's what I found, comparing 4.75 and 6.0.
>
> I ran these tests on the same machine, a Pentium 233 MMX CPU (which the
> MINIMUM requirement for Netscape 6) with 128 MB RAM (which is twice what
> is required). I ran them as a user, under Gnome and Red Hat 7.0, stock
> installation (i.e, no patches). I tried to configure both versions
> identically (start with blank page, accept only cookies from originating
> server, same font, and both with the same theme (classic) in event that
> the 6.0 modern theme loaded differently. I also cleared the disk and
> memory cache after each test (I am not actually sure that the caches on
> 6.0 cleared, as the buttons did not depress when I clicked them and I
> never got a dialogue box confirming that I wanted to clear them as I did
> in 4.75). I also told the program never to compare the current page with
> the network; I didn't change anything else on the system while
> running the tests. All of these should have leveled the ground for a
> baseline for testing.
>
> My spohisticated timing method consisted of a stop watch triggered with
> my left hand when my right clicked the mouse on the icon in the panel. I
> averaged the times for three trials, alternating loading the programs,
> and unloading each completely before running the other.
>
> First, I loaded the programs and timed them to see how long they would
> take to open to a blank page. 4.75 used about 5.5 seconds, 6.0 about
> 22.0. So 4.75 seems to load almost 4 times as fast as 6.0.
>
> Next I loaded the programs, then after they loaded, opened a web page. I
> choose www.amazon.com since it has cookies and stills seems to load
> fairly quickly, and also the CLUE web page. I considered the page loaded
> when the little bar stopped filling, and the page said "done".
> Times for 4.75 were about 7 seconds for 4.75 and 18 for 6.0 for amazon,
> and for CLUE. It would appear that 4.75 is about twice as fast 6.0. It
> should be noted that, during the test, on two occasions when I clicked
> open page, 6.0 shut down completely, and once it
> appeared to stall and took 34 seconds to load, so I threw that out.
>
> Now mind you these are a system that is running the absolute lower limit
> hardware for 6.0. You might want to try them for your system and see if
> they are faster. You can use my methods for comparison if you want.
>
> Jim Intriglia wrote:
>
> > John,
> >
> > What you wrote is good information and feedback re: the Netscape 6
product.
> > I would like to include it in the article I wrote with your permission.
(As
> > per my usual practice, I credit anyone who helps me with these articles
(as
> > an editor, reviewer or content contributor) on the page the article
appears
> > as well as in the article itself. Do you have a web site that I can
> > reference (link to) in the article, or is "John Kottal of CLUE"
sufficient
> > when acknowledging the source of the info (your benchmark comparision
of NS
> > V4.x vs Netscape 6).
> >
> > To continue:
> >
> > ----Original Message Follows----
> > From: John Kottal <jlkottal at americanisp.net>
> > Reply-To: clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us
> > To: clue-talk at clue.denver.co.us
> > Subject: Re: [CLUE-Talk] Review of Netcape 6 for Linux
> > Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:56:16 -0700
> >
> > Jim Intriglia wrote:
> >
> > > I am putting the finishing touches on the first of a series of
articles
> > I'm writing on
> > > the new and recently released of Netscape 6 Communicator/Navigator
> > product for Linux.
> >
> > >>
> > The experiences related in your article paralleled mine.
> >
> > It took about six tries to download the entire program, even with a DSL
> > connection. The download process kept stalling in the middle of the
spelling
> > module, and each time I tried again, it restarted from scratch. I
finally
> > tried about 6:00 AM and was able to complete the process. The entire
> > download and installation took about 30 - 45 minutes, most of which was
> > spent downloading the Java 2 files. site)
> > >>
> >
> > My guess is that Netscape (or whoever is hosting that portion of the
web has
> > a problem along the lines of load balancing - the downloads were
stalling to
> > to traffic demand. Be nice to know for sure what the deal was with
respect
> > to this problem. Maybe I should send them a copy of the review.
> >
> > >>
> > I did not like the installer program: not only must it be run from
XWindows
> > (so much for security),
> > >>
> >
> > I am not aware of the potential for a secuirity violation that you
elude to.
> > If logged-in as root, with the PC properly secured, why would doing the
> > install via XWindows be any less secure than from the command line?
> >
> > >>
> > it installs to /usr/local, and this creates unnecessary problems with
file
> > permissions: either one does the download as root (so much for the
Principle
> > of Least Privilege) or one does it as a user, and then has to fiddle
with
> > file permissions. I would much rather download the entire thing and
then
> > install it later.
> > >>
> >
> > I installed as root, and did not see any problems with its' default
install
> > folder of /usr/local - that's OK as far as the Unix Hierarchy spec. No
> > permission problems encountered (I was able to boot Netscape logged in
as a
> > user in the same fashion as I did as root. My other experiences with
> > software requiring me to install as root (which makes sense) also
require me
> > to screw around with permissions on some/all of the files, before users
> > could boot the application, something I did not appreciate.
> >
> > I think in retrospect the StarOffice V5.2 install had it right. Install
as
> > root, and then do a mini-install for users that you wish to grant
access,
> > with the installer taking care to set file permissions so that the
sucker
> > will boot.
> >
> > Make sense or am I missing your point?
> >
> > >>
> > My system is a Pentium 233 MMX with 128 MB RAM. Netscape 6 will run on
it,
> > but it is about 3 times slower than 4.75 to get up and running.
> > Additionally, it is noticably slower while running, but not to the
point of
> > annoyment.
> > >>
> >
> > I read things along this line in two other reviews. Kinda throws a
bucket on
> > all of the Gecko technology hype, which was supposed to increase speed
over
> > NS V4.x. Unless of course it's a memory deal. I'll need to check the
spec
> > sheet for minimum NS requirements on CPU spped and RAM.
> >
> > >>
> > Netscape 6 seems to be designed to run only under GNOME and possibly
under
> > RedHat: it did not want to install under Slackware and KDE, giving
error
> > messages that there were libraries that (I think) were installed as
part of
> > GNOME missing (sorry, I can't remember
> > the names, something like GTK), and even after going back and
installing
> > GNOME, I was unable to get it working.
> > >>
> >
> > Good information. If memory serves, I believe there is a not in the NS
> > Readme, web page, or one of the other reviews along these lines. I'll
check
> > it out and add to the article with respect to this issue.
> >
> > >>
> > The modern GUI is somewhat washed out on my screen compared to 4.75,
but
> > there is an
> > option to revert to the older interface if so desired.
> > >>
> >
> > Wonder if that is the fault of the default theme/skin. May want to try
> > changing to something else, so see if the appearance approves.
> >
> > >>
> > I am not sure that I like this new version. I've used Netscape now
since
> > version 2.0
> > under Windows, and much, much prefer it over any other browser,
including
> > Opera and
> > Internet Explorer. I've tried Opera and Conquerer under Linux, and
always
> > gone back to
> > Netscape. But given my druthers, I may just go to KDE's Conquerer and
stay
> > with that, as
> > I much prefer KDE over GNOME.
> > >>
> >
> > You are not alone - NS V6 in two other reviews I have read were not
> > favorable. I think the choice of going with GNOME was made based on
that
> > joint annoucement by the big fellas (IBM, HP and SUN) along the liones
of
> > supporting GNOME as the default XWin environment for enterprise systems
> > (shipped). Was that not Sun's announcement I believe?
> >
> > Will not look at Opera until they do a real production release,
> > hopefully soon!
> >
> > JimI.
> >
> > John Kottal
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CLUE-Talk mailing list
> > CLUE-Talk at clue.denver.co.us
> > http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk
> >
> >
_____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
http://explorer.msn.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CLUE-Talk mailing list
> > CLUE-Talk at clue.denver.co.us
> > http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk
> _______________________________________________
> CLUE-Talk mailing list
> CLUE-Talk at clue.denver.co.us
> http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk
_______________________________________________
CLUE-Talk mailing list
CLUE-Talk at clue.denver.co.us
http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
More information about the clue-talk
mailing list