JTK wrote:
> > Or maybe it's opinion. Ever think of that?
> No.
Time you did then.
> Huh? "To show the progress that has been made"?!? I thought that was
> why 6.0 was released.
No, Netscape released 6.0 because they NEEDED to get a new version out before
the year ended. Their choice was rushed by their marketing department, and had
nothing to do with Mozilla.
> About two years too late, even if true. Who's reviewed NS6.1? I've not
> read a single review yet (other than from the Faithful). The world has
> forgotten about Netscape, rabbi.
While I don't really care about Netscape PRs, I know CNet reviewed it. Their
reviewers were guarded but optimistic for the final 6.1. We all know that 6.0
final sucked, and that the PRs, while beta, were high for beta quality, while
6.0 final was crap for final quality, so CNet is taking it a bit more carefully
with 6.1, but are optimistic that 6.1 final will be everything 6.0 should and
could have been. The average user rating is 4 stars, which is damn good for a
beta. 69% of the users gave it a "thumbs up".
ZD Net mentioned it, but I can't locate a review in a few moments of searching.
It's users also gave it an average of 4 out of 5 stars.
> > Yes, NS6 sucked, we all know that. But I think you need to
> > take a fresh look at where things are.
> I do that pretty much every day. And when I do so, I'm loudly accused
> of being a "hypocrite" by certain religious factions of the Body.
I know for a fact you do not look at it every day as in another group you admit
to not having seen the new Modern theme, which is a couple months old. Now's
who's lying?
--
jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism. ]
email [ jesusx @ who.net ]
web [ http://burntelectrons.com ] [ Updated April 29, 2001 ]
tag [ The Universe: It's everywhere you want to be. ]
warning [ All your base are belong to us. ]
