There is a short story in the NYT today about a small, but vocal, group of Netscape users who don't like the new, more interactive, Netscape. The story explains that a petition has been started to change the new Netscape back to the old Netscape where we (AOL) programmed the experience.
There is one piece of misinformation in the story: that we tried to silence the folks doing the petition by not letting them vote up negative Netscape stories on the new Netscape--that's simply not true. We've had a dozen negative stories about Netscape on the home page--just like DIGG has--and we understand that part of running a social news site is that your user base will use the site itself to talk to you. In fact, any negative story on AOL, Netscape, or myself immediatly goes to the number one position.
That's the price you pay for letting folks take control--they actually do it!
I think some folks don't understand that there is a window in which a story can remain on the homepage (just over a day). We do this so the news stays fresh (i.e. when you come back 24 hours later it's not the same self-propogating list stuck at the top level).
I respect the fact that a group of folks liked the original home page better, and they don't want to participate in the new social news site--it's not for everyone. However, this is a very small percentage of the over millions of unique users who come to Netscape, and for AOL there is a very strategic reason for evolving Netscape.com. That reason is we already have a professionally programmed portal in AOL.COM! Also, we told the users about the change for a month, but some folks I think ignored or missed the messaging. That's a big take away here: over communicate with your members (oh wait, I put this in a recent post--I guess I need to take more of my own advice). If I were to do this again I would put a message that blocked users from visiting the site until they had read a note about the upcoming changes. Live and learn.
Additionally, the fact was that the majority of users were not sticking with the old Netscape. A quick look at the stats (not Alexia please--it doesn't count the Netscape browser--where a large percentage of our traffic comes from) shows that Netscape lost 1/3rd of its audience over the past year.
So, we lost a third of the audience by not changing the site, and now by changing we're going to lose a very small percentage, but be back on a growth path.
Look at it this way: if Geocities could change itself to MySpace before losing it's marketshare to MySpace you would do that right?
Same thing here, we're in the middle of paradigm shift from top-down control to bottom-up participation, and when you make a radical change like that you're gonna get pushback. In fact, I'm really excited to see the pushback because it let's me know we are on the right track.
Any new service is gonna get folks who don't like it. The more radical or forward looking an idea is the more folks are gonna be shocked by it--and this is a radical (but soon-to-be established) concept.
We anticipated in our projections that a large percentage of the audience might not like the new portal (double digits) and we're well below that (single digits)--so, I think we did a good job. When you change the menu at your restaurant some folks are gonna like the old menu better... we understand that and we're sorry we can't maintain two versions of the site forever--but this is a business and we have to grow it. For those folks the AOL.COM portal is still providing the classic portal experience with a massive amount of new stuff including a ton of video and programmed news.
It is ironic, of course, that some folks are voting for *less* interactivity and control, but I understand it. I don't want the New York Times to be a social news site... I think.
Old vs. New Netscape (or "if you could change GeoCities into MySpace in 2002 would you have?")
Recent Posts
- Are social networks dragging down CPMs? (5/15/2008)
- How to get a car loan (5/14/2008)
- Sydney Blogger Breakfast (5/14/2008)
- Feedback on my Powerset Verdict (5/14/2008)
- Mahalo Daily host search down to six finalists... (5/14/2008)
Reader Comments
(Page 1 of 25)2. Jason,
You say you don't censor the comments but you did close a bunch of the threads critical to the new look. Like this one http://tech.netscape.com/story/2006/07/01/a-request-by-the-netscape-community-to-bring-back-our-netscapecom/comments/2/#commentsEnd
Since you closed them, users could no longer comment on them and move them up the list anymore. You can't even find it in the site search results anymore but they show up in results Google http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=A+Request+by+the+Netscape+Community+to+Bring+Back+Our+Netscape.com&btnG=Google+Search (Gotta Love Google!)
It's funny how you don't see that as censorship. You're a fraud!
3. I think the new netscape SUCKS TOO!
Posted at 5:28PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Kathy
4. Actually, although we do see things from completely different perspectives, what I see is not a "very small percentage " or people upset with the new webpage. It's most of the old netscape users. Also, AOL's page isn't like the old netscape. Honestly, i've began using a different site for my news and such which has no relation to this site. Just letting you know how things are out here.
Later!
Posted at 5:35PM on Jul 17th 2006 by OneTimeUser
5. I have used Netscape for years. The mail system is still one of the best. This new web design has the aesthetics of a polluted pond. If so many people like the new site, where are their comments? I miss being able to quickly glance over the news articles each morning. I guess I will get used to it.
Posted at 5:49PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Vicki Plant
6.
I don't mind the screen change, but when I go to the tv section to check certain comments abouts shows,example law & order, all I get is a form to order the ny times. I did not have this problem before.
Posted at 5:50PM on Jul 17th 2006 by elizabeth fariello
7. Well...I hope Netscape finds the right combination to keep their audience. For me I've been using Netscape as my home page since it first started up (long before Internet Explorer became popular) and grew to like and rely on the information I needed all right there in front of me (yellow/white pages, stock quotes, weather, google search, maps, etc.). This new format takes all of that away (and I haven't found it again yet). I use the Drudgereport and CNN for my news so I wasn't looking for another new site. It's likely I'll switch to Comcast.com or some other site that still has the variety of info I am looking for on the home page.
Posted at 5:51PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Mavrik02
8. Add me to the list of those who really hate your new look & 'home page.' Sorry, I won't use AOL either! (Some suggestion that is!)
Now, I just use Netscape for email and bookmarks - too bad! I used to enjoy many of your features and links. And how are you measuring user satisfaction - so you know it's only that 'very small percentage' you're claiming? You may have attracted some new attention because of the change and its resulting controversy, but good luck keeping it! I'm gone!
Posted at 5:52PM on Jul 17th 2006 by pj
9. I don't like the new sight one bit. Who cares what other people think is newsworthy? Just give me the news. How come there are so few votes if this new format is being well received? I look at the sight a few times a day and I would never even THINK of voting on this foolishness.
Posted at 5:56PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Rich
10. Vicki, we have over 20,000 active users currently on the new Netscape and many more readers, but only about 1,000 of those users have complained about the switch, and many of the ones who initially complained have changed their minds.
There are some words of praise here and there if you look closely, but for the most part, the growing community of people too busy using the site to bother complimenting it is evidence enough that people like it.
Posted at 6:01PM on Jul 17th 2006 by C.K. Sample III
11. I have to agree with the minority here. I have used the Netscape home page since it started many...many years ago. This new design was move in the wrong direction (less concise and poorly organized) also some of the animation (i.e. overview frame) is not that great.
Posted at 6:01PM on Jul 17th 2006 by David
12. This is pure marketing humbug. You say there are few complaints - thats because most users will not bother - they'll simply drop the site and service altogether. You only accept comments from people who sign up. Most will refuse.
Take my case - I only ever use e-mail. I'm not interested in reading what some other thick bastard thinks I should read. I'm even less interested on voting on it. And think about it conceptually - being asked to vote on whether a news story should go to the top of the page is obscene. Vote on whether the latest outrage in iraq gets top billing? Or the murder in Lebanon? Or the latest soap? What you have set up is morally indefensible, is a waste of time, and takes too long to navigate
Posted at 6:02PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Demdike
13. I hate the new Netscape. Give me back the old one please!
Posted at 6:06PM on Jul 17th 2006 by dshank
14. Personally after being a loyal netscape user for many years and after checking out aol's portal as an alternative to the old netscape???? No comparison. The old netscape was much better. Why not change the aol portal and give us back our Netscape.
What!!!!! AOL taking a chance on changing there portal. LOL
Not a chance. Might bring on more criticism. Let's change Netscape instead. Let's face it , There was a reason Loyal Netscape users used the Netscape portal and a Reason AOL users used AOL. Not going to try to beat up the AOL fans out there. There is enough of that going on already, but there is no comparison to the 2 portals .
Not to mention AOL users have a different looking home page when they open there browser versus us netscape users going to AOL . com I have already changed my home page and unless the old Netscape look doesn't com back I doubt I will return. By the way ,my new homepage is neither Netscape nor AOL.
Posted at 6:09PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Frank Wright
15. Unless I am viewing the concept of the new format erroneously, it seems that it makes the news a popularity contest, with the highest number of votes (or dialogue) on a specific news item moving that story to the top of the page. In essence, the importance of a news story is determined by the reader. For example if everyone comments on Tom Cruise's new baby, that story might move up on the board above, say, a bombing in Beirut. From my viewpoint, the news is not a popularity contest.
Posted at 6:24PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Dave Wilson
16. I don't mind the change anymore...I switched to Firefox for all my web searches.
Posted at 6:59PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Jack Brinkerhoff
17. This is technical, not content-related: It's still ironic that so many of your pages don't show right in your own Netscape browser, but they show fine in Internet Explorer. This very story, for example. When I clicked on it, I was confronted with a page that was missing about an inch of its left margin. The scroll bar was all the way over, so there was no help for it. There was no way to read the extreme left (i.e., the first word or so of every line). So I exited and then came back in Explorer, and the story displayed perfectly.
Truly funny!
DK
Posted at 7:04PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Dean Kennedy
18. Yes. I would like to know where I can get the old link to the old Netscape? I used to read the "WHAT'S NEW" everyday.
That little yellow box that you clicked and there was all these great news stories. Where can I read those again?
Thank you
Posted at 7:05PM on Jul 17th 2006 by PAM
19. This new format really stinks, I have been using Netscape for around 6 years, now I have to go else where for the news and it has me trying new Browsers also, I didn't want to change, but this new style appeals to those with the IQ of a small soap dish. I want to read the news... not write it.
Posted at 7:06PM on Jul 17th 2006 by moatsyjr
20. I agree with the nays.....I liked the compact version of all news, articles, and entertainment all being right there. You could just scan quickly and click on what you liked. I had weather in the old netscape too and now I don't (I haven't looked that hard, but it was right at the top of the page in the old format) Bring back the old look, or at least shorten up the new look. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't go really much further than what I see initially, let alone "turn" pages to see what else is making news. Very disappointing. And maybe you aren't getting a lot of feed back from people because they feel as though it won't make a difference...I've hated the new format since it came out, but didn't say anything until I read this article (which just happened to be at the top of the page...any lower and I would have missed it entirely!!!) Maybe you could do a pop up vote or something and see what everyone really thinks!!
Posted at 7:06PM on Jul 17th 2006 by MindyLee
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
1. Great response.
GigaOM says your traffic's up 17% since the relaunch (http://gigaom.com/2006/07/17/netscape-has-attention-if-nothing-else/).
Not bad for a week (what does that compound to annually?!).
Posted at 3:40PM on Jul 17th 2006 by Nicholas