New Netscape = New Coke?
Over the past couple of
days I've gotten 170 comments (and still going!) on a post I wrote last week entitled Netscape Community
Backlash. I've actually gotten more comments than the
official Netscape story on this topic. The general gist of the feedback is that
existing Netscape users dislike the new digg-like Netscape and want their old portal back.
A few commenters compared the new version of Netscape to the New Coke debacle in the 1980's, when Coca-Cola introduced a new formula which turned into a public relations disaster.
As well as the expressions of hatred for the new community news-style Netscape, it's noticeable how many people still associate Netscape's homepage with the Netscape browser. In many ways it's common sense to associate the two together, because there is still a browser named 'Netscape'. But it does show that Netscape management has a branding problem, to add to the considerable teething problems they're having transitioning a reluctant 12 million users to the digg style homepage.
Without repeating what I wrote in my previous post, nevertheless I think it's worthwhile re-printing a couple of emails I received today - which seem to sum up the feelings of these Netscape users. Here's one from "another older, non-techie":
"It has been about 8 years that I've been on Netscape, at work and at home. Everyone here in the office is using MSN except me, because I'm more familiar with Netscape. It has always presented what I wanted & needed in a format that worked well for me.
I wouldn't've minded the format change so much if it hadn't made it impossible to get to my e-mail. "Go to MyNetscape..." No dice. I thought it might've been a problem with my home computer, so I tried going in thru the computer here at work. Snake-eyes.
After having been on for about a week, it now seems to be willing to let me into my Netscape e-mail account more easily. Too late: my husband, sons & I have sent out to everyone on our e-mail lists that we are now on Optonline.net (as much as it galls me to cast more of my lot in with the Dolans!) And, yes, like #26 said, it's kinda worrisome that ANYBODY can post ANY story without knowing how much research they did first. And, yes, the news format DOES kinda feel like a reality show.
As soon as I get a couple of extra minutes today at lunchtime, I'll need to change my homepage. Sorry, but I actually access the internet for work-related info more often than for pleasure, so I need for it to be mundane and predictable. I actually kinda liked that I got The Big Stories right there as I was on my way to do research."
What's Netscape doing about this? They're currently pointing its portal-loving users to AOL. On the Netscape homepage is this message: "Looking for a classic portal style? We suggest the new AOL.COM."
However AOL.com doesn't wash with James Avery, who emailed me this message to Netscape boss Jason Calacanis:
"You [meaning Jason Calacanis] said elsewhere, "the old Netscape and current AOL are basically the same (just a different logo up top), so we're sending the folks who like a 'top down' or 'classic' portal to AOL."
The two portals were NOT basically the same. AOL.com was ALWAYS an option to the current Netscape.com user base, though 12 million users declined to use AOL.com in favor of Netscape.com which appealed to them. These users are now up for grabs by all of your competitors, and I hardly see how AOL is in a position to have not treaded lightly here. Some of the existing users have voiced their concerns, but I suspect many others will just quietly reprogram their start pages to other portals. Seems like AOL is saying F*** YOU to all of the 12 million people who had enjoyed a portal that disappeared overnight. Nice attitude. I think you owe its users and investors in the company a clear and convincing explanation."
It certainly looks like the people have spoken. And they're not happy. Will the new Netscape go the way of the New Coke? Or will Calacanis and crew get over this hurdle and convince a good portion of those 12 million users to stick around? Judging by the comments on my previous post, many of them seem to be already migrating to MSN and Yahoo. Forget the Rocketboom soap opera, this is much more interesting!
2 TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2693
FOLLOW RWW ON TWITTER
RECENT JOBS
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
If I were AOL I would pull the plug on this ill-fated experiment immediately. They should've started with a brand new site, advertising it across AOL's properties, rather then torpedoing a successful website. A website, I may add, with many satisfied FREE customers, which is supposedly what AOL is going to transition to!
It's not too late to turn back. I highly doubt that the new Netscape has picked up more then a few thousand serious users, and I would wager the number of people who have submitted 3 new stories or more is closer to 500.
Posted by: Ted | July 10, 2006 7:01 PM
The big question is: would listening to the angry users and switching back to "classic netscape" revitalise the brand like switching back to "classic coke" did?
Posted by: Mr Angry | July 10, 2006 9:48 PM
Yeah, that is a good point and also probably points to this move being the vanguard of the new AOL strategy and not actually contrary to it as I previously wrote. Netscape's core audience definitely wasn't getting younger or richer. However I don't understand why they don't just create an exact version of the old site and let those people who want to stay on it, stay on it, if for no other reason then to quiet down this noise which is harming the transition.
It is intersting though that these angry Netscape users are voiceless, because they're not bloggers, they're not part of the two-way web, they're not engaged with the web's active participatory users. Thus you get these massive comment chains on (no offense) basically unrelated websites like this one. If 1 million bloggers were angry about their netscape being taken away, you can bet it would be on page 1 of the NY Times Business section before long.
Posted by: Ted | July 10, 2006 10:28 PM
Glad to know about it.
Posted by: Paul | July 11, 2006 4:23 AM
It probably boils down to the "Scrolling" factor - and that attention getting Image or Video
It appears that AOL has mastered the One Consuming GLANCE & Focus factor, very well with MSN coming in second.
Netscape is requiring Scrolling, and there is NO intriquing "FIRST" eyecatching image or Video that piques curiousities.
Also looking at the Votes their stories get, Netscape users do not appear to enjoy interactivity...
But, like everything else - they will have to tweak the concept to pefection
Posted by: Search Engine WEB | July 11, 2006 3:54 PM
Thanks for following up! I enjoy the new Netscape but I also have sympathy for the previous portal users. I have not made the new Netscape my browser homepage yet, but it could replace Bloglines as my first read.
Posted by: Steven | July 11, 2006 5:34 PM
Guys I hate to tell you, but there's nothing to roll back to. The team that was formerly responsible for the old Netscape is now responsbile for finding themselves new jobs.
Posted by: TWE | July 11, 2006 7:01 PM
One nice thing about the new Netscape is that it allowed me to submit both MacManus articles that articulately explained why it is a failure. As Ted (above) pointed out, we're voiceless, but at least I can do that. On the Netscape site, Jason Calacanis actually responds to this article, but I believe he is completely wrong.
Essentially, I don't see how an unfiltered list of articles from randomly voting users can produce anything close to what the smart people running the old Netscape produced.
I'm amused by Netscape's implication that they are part of some bold new internet experiment. They simply copied Digg, which is easy and cheap to reproduce. There isn't any actual thinking here and certainly no leading edge technology. At the same time, no one has been able to match the quality of the old Netscape.com. Sad.
Posted by: KeithAdv | July 11, 2006 9:09 PM
Good article. The comparison to Coke is not quite perfect though. New Coke was a decent product replacing a market-leading product. The New Netscape is a decent product replacing a dying product. So I'd say it's more like "New RC Cola" maybe? :)
I think the more interesting thing to watch here is what happens when you take 12 million people who are not really part of a "community" and try to create an instant community out of them. The new Netscape, like Newsvine and Digg, *requires* the community in order to make things work. Will a lot of those 12 million people drop completely out of this new system? Absolutely. But the real question is, how low will the uniques drop and when (if ever) will they swing up again. I think that even if Netscape's uniques drop to 1 or 2 million people, that's enough to turn things around as long as about half of those people are productive users.
I'm not betting money either way. All I know is that based on how Jason and his team react, the site could either die a steady death (which it was already doing) or experience a dramatic and majestic turnaround over the next couple of years.
Posted by: Mike D. | July 11, 2006 9:26 PM
People who wanted to vote on news would have already been at Digg. Was it a case of thinking the users at Netscape simply needed greatness thrusted upon them? I think the problem is two-fold: Poor management - change management has to be handled carefully as most people do not like change. Users rebel. This has a direct affect on the projects eventual success, no matter how beneficial the change might be. AOL has a conservative user base, and it seems the Web 2.0 crowd failed to understand that. Change must be incremental with such a user base. Secondly, the majority of users are looking for authority when it comes to media, not social interaction. I dare say most digg/slashdot users are driven by the desire to participate in large groups, which is more often seen in the young. I imagine the Netscape demographic is somewhat older. In short, put people before technology.
Posted by: Peter | July 12, 2006 1:49 PM
Mike D. and Peter, you're both on it. The wants and needs of the Netscape user base was not taken into consideration. The previous change to the Netscape portal was not well received and was promptly turned off. That's how Mr. Calacanis ended up with it, Miller and Leonsis needed something to crush his spirit since they had just purchased Weblogs. There's no better way to get rid of an exec than giving them Netscape to change. There's plenty of info on the Netscape user base and everyone knew they were happy with what they had. Truely, it doesn't matter to Jason if you or anyone else likes the new Netscape. As he said in the NewYork mag article, “And in the worst-case scenario, whatever, no reason to cry for me. I could start a company tomorrow.". He's been given budget to run Netscape (into the ground) for a year and that what he'll do. He doesn't care if you like it, he's already got his. And there's will always be enough hanger-ons telling him it's great, that's he'll never pay attention to the unwashed masses that aren't Web 2.0 compliant.
Posted by: TWE | July 12, 2006 6:40 PM
The wunderkinder pulled off one sale of a bunch of splogs. Now he's qualified to quarterback this thing? Just before they sold, they couldn't even keep the servers up.
Where are we now? Business 3.0, rc .009 ?
Nice for Calcanis, but the deep background just ain't there.
Posted by: plumsauce | July 13, 2006 4:58 AM
Calacanis wrt "neu" Netscape = King Midas in reverse, with subtle nuances of The Hudsucker Proxy:
Time Warner Board Member 1: What if you tire before it's done?
Time Warner Board Member 2: Does it have rules?
Time Warner Board Member 3: Can more than one play?
Time Warner Board Member 4: What makes you think it's a game?
Time Warner Board Member 3: Is it a game?
Time Warner Board Member 5: Will it break?
Time Warner Board Member 6: It better break eventually!
Time Warner Board Member 2: Is there an object?
Time Warner Board Member 1: What if you tire before it's done?
Time Warner Board Member 5: Does it come with batteries?
Time Warner Board Member 4: We could charge extra for them.
Time Warner Board Member 7: Is it safe for toddlers?
Time Warner Board Member 3: How can you tell when you're finished?
Time Warner Board Member 2: How do you make it stop?
Time Warner Board Member 6: Is that a boy's model?
Time Warner Board Member 3: Can a parent assemble it?
Time Warner Board Member 5: Is there a larger model for the obese?
Time Warner Board Member 1: What if you tire before it's done?
Time Warner Board Member 8: What the hell is it?
When you're dead, you stay dead. Don't believe me, ask Steve Case and Gerald Levin.
But still, perhaps this is only the beginning of the story of how Jason Calacanis climbed waaay up to the fifty-fifth floor of 10 Columbus Circle, and then fell all the way down but didn't quite squish hisself. You know, they say there was a man who jumped from the fifty-SIXTH floor? But that's another story..
Posted by: Rob in NoVA | July 13, 2006 5:04 AM
I agree with everything said here. Sadly Mr. Calacanis is living in his own bubble and
After years following Netscape (both as a netscape.com site visitor, and web browser user) and as journalist, I sadly have to agree with comment #11.
He´ll run Netscape.com into the ground -or maybe a new influx of clueless users will replace the existing netscape.com audience --but one thing is certain: the damage and annoyance to the core netscape.com user base will be long-listing.
The last time AOL had a clue was when Steve Case had power. His vision included an AOL that could compete (via Netscape, and via the iPlanet alliance with Sun before that) with Microsoft on Software, and would become independent of the reliance on Microsoft´s technology.
Hence the "Gateway Connected Touchpad" internet appliance co-developed with AOL and Netscape, which used Midori Linux and the Netscape/Mozilla Gecko browser to render HTML.
Hence the "Netcenter" portal, that was a good one around yr 2000-2001, with all AOL´s "properties" integrated into a single screen, notably CNN, AIM, Mapquest, etc.
There was even a Netscape Calendar at one point!.
Sadly all that was wasted, because of its clueless management after Steve Case was moved out of the away.
The sad part is that Calacanis, like Jeff Papows -another Microsoft lover who destroyed Lotus and gave Microsoft a big helping hand to dominate the browser market via MSIE embedding into Notes at a time when Netscape could have used some help from Lotus-, will happily go home after he has destroyed a great brand name.
Netscape webmail to be killed by AIM after Calacanis experiment
AOL annoys faithful Netscapers
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33125
Google calendar is proof Netscape was right
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31363
APR 30, 2006
Oh well...
Just my $0.02
FC
Posted by: Fernando Cassia | July 19, 2006 12:47 PM
I'd used Netscape for approx 8 years.
After trying out a few different sites, I've finally settled on http://msnbc.msn.com/ as its replacement. It has an excellent variety of links down the left side of the page where I can find all the real news. I'm actually even starting to like it better than the old Netscape. It's better organized.
I've read hundreds of the comments about new Netscape, and none of them are positive.
I'd been holding out in the hope that the old Netscape would come back, but just read above that the old crew's been fired so I guess that's the end of that.
Jason, All I can say to you is you're twice the idiot I first thought you were, since it seems now that you can't see or admit you've made a huge mistake (the mistake being the part that made me think you were an idiot in the first place).
What were you thinking?
Posted by: Mark Brooker | July 31, 2006 7:46 AM
Others have said it more eloquently... I shall append my comments to add to the numbers of voices (though I sincerely doubt that anyone is listening nor cares)....
I have been with Netscape through the version 8.0 debacle and way before that. No longer, this wanna be Digg is insulting. I moved the first day it came up and I had to rebuild my profiles to get my emails. Then I went to other family members and rebuilt theirs so they could get their email.
You folks really need to have something better to do with your time... go mess with AOL and leave us alone.
Posted by: Lee Stilleke | August 7, 2006 4:32 PM
try aagin to post here....
I HATE AOL, AND HAVE FROM MY MASTERS & PHD SCHOOL DAYS. THE KIDDIE DOLLAR STORE OF SERVICE! NOW, LIKE MANY I READ, MY EMAILS AND FILES ARE STRIPPED AWAY ALSO.
WOULD IT OF BEEN TO HARD FOR SOME DIM-WITTED IDIOT AT NETSCAPE OR AOL TO WARN US??
TYPICAL BUSINESS- JUST SCREW THE CUSTOMERS!!
AND WE KNOW NO ONE WILL FIX OR EVEN ADDRESS THIS - I SAY BOYCOTT AOL !!
IT'S THE ONLY WAY THEY WILL ADDRESS ANY FIX. EVERYONE SHOULD USE ANOTHER EMAIL, SEARCH OR CHAT WEB SITE. ONLY CHECK YOUR AOL EMAIL ONCE A MONTH!! SPREAD THE MESSAGE FAR AND WIDE - LETS GET SOME PAYBACK !!!
HOW ABOUT SOME OLD FASHION ACTION, THE HELL WITH POLITICALLY CORRECT CRAP!!
I BLAME FABIENNE (TRYING TO BE FRENCH EURO TRASH?)- AND THE COWARD HAS NO POSTED EMAIL!! WHAT A SHORT VISION DIM WITTED TWIT!!! BLAME FABIENNE!!!
BOYCOTT AOL !!!!! SPREAD THE WORD!!!!! WANNA-BE-FRENCHY-FABIENNE SUCKS!!!!!
DR. Z
Posted by: DR. Z | August 26, 2006 3:47 AM
This whole thing is very annoying. First, they mess up the mail screen, so there is mostly junk on the page and very little room for actual messages, then mess up the home page, with "news" reports that I can't figure out where they come from, and most of the articles are half-covered up by the black box on the left and can't be read anyway, and then the e-mail program is "improved" beyond recognition. I don't have AOL because I don't want AOL, I originally began using Netscape because I didn't want to use Internet Explorer. I tried Firefox and found that it fought with some other programs I use a lot.
Posted by: Linden Malki | August 26, 2006 9:04 PM
Netscape/AOL has ruined everything. First they took away their very functional Netscape homepage and replaced it with a dysfunctional Diggs style webpage and now they totally messed up my email accounts. Over the years I kept my junk email separate from my personal email by directing the junk mail to my netscape address and personal mail to my AOL account. Now with the great netscape/AOL email conversion its all going to my AOL address. What a mess! It doesn't seem like a great business model for success to totally alienate loyal customers. Plus they're giving AOL away free to folks who have other ISPs. It's a no brainer for me. I can get free email addresses elsewhere, and when my contract with AOL is up I'll be switching to a less expensive ISP.
Posted by: W Clem | September 2, 2006 6:40 PM