Talk:Netscape/Archives/2017
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Netscape. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140603235609/http://archive.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/1998/11/16466 to http://archive.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/1998/11/16466
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Netscape. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060628022321/http://www.catdancers.com:80/webmags/webrevu/1997/04_18/developers/04_18_97_2.html to http://www.catdancers.com/webmags/webrevu/1997/04_18/developers/04_18_97_2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Date Netscape became defunct
I don't dispute that Netscape is no longer in operation as a separate entity, but I think we need to be careful how we word this in the article. These edits suggest that the company was dissolved in 2017, which is simply not the case. Netscape as a company was not legally dissolved; AOL renamed "Netscape Communications Corporation" to "New Aurora Corporation" (Source: see State of California Secretary of State business filings: click "New Aurora Corporation," and click PDF dated 03/16/2012 titled, "Amended Registration.") The following month, AOL sold the corporation formerly known as Netscape to Microsoft, who in turn sold the company to Facebook, which is why the California Secretary of State filings show Facebook's address as New Aurora Corporation's address. During the sales, AOL retained the Netscape trademarks, which is why AOL continues to use the Netscape brand to market the discount ISP.
So the company is not legally dissolved; it still exist but was renamed and sold and resold and is now a non-operating subsidiary of Facebook. The references that were provided in this edit are to third party aggregators looking at business filings in states where AOL/Microsoft/Facebook either abandoned or withdrew Netscape's local business filing. When a company withdraws their business filing in one state (or even multiple states), it doesn't necessarily mean the company is defunct--in this case, the corporate entity still legally exists in California and Delaware (where it is incorporated). The edits also suggest the company became "brand-only" in 2017; based on the above sources, this actually happened five years earlier (or even up to fourteen years earlier according to the engadget source in the paragraph below).
Based on this, we should be careful about how we word this. It might be better to say something like, "Netscape ceased operations as an operating subsidiary in 2003" (which is what this source (and several other sources from the period) suggests, though it notes that AOL continued to develop the Netscape software internally until 2008), but clarify that with a blurb about the Microsoft/Facebook sale, and AOL's continuing use of the Netscape brand after 2003 into the present. If I'm not busy during the holiday, I can try to make these edits myself. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 20:00, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
- Oh come on, this info should have been added to the article a long long time ago. Since this article is titled as "Netscape", the article first line should be changed to reflect the brand.Granthew (talk) 00:27, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Netscape may currently be basically a brand, but the main subject of this article is the corporation, and that's what Netscape is best known as—the company that made Netscape Navigator. The way the lead is currently written seems confusing to me, and I'm not sure if this article should be focussing on the brand specifically. It would probably be a good idea to include information about the corporation's and the brand name's current status in the history section, but I think the primary topic of this article should be (and still is, really, considering the content of the non-header sections) the corporation and its products. pwnzor.ak (talk) 03:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)