About:
Beonex Communicator is Mozilla polished for end users. It contains Navigator, Mailnews, Composer, and ChatZilla. Navigator has support for key web standards and a convenient interface. For example, it eases searching the Internet, similar to Apple's Sherlock on Macintosh. The Bookmark Manager can deal with huge collections of bookmarks and allows you to overview and sort them while you are surfing. If you want, you can track the latest headlines or webcams using the Sidebar. The Mailnews client supports multiple IMAP, POP3 and/or news accounts for each user, so you can download and manage all your email from various accounts in one place and store them on your computer or the server. Beonex puts a strong emphasis on security, privacy, and netiquette, to protect the private or confidential information on your computer and to encourage fairness.

Author:
Beonex [contact developer]

Rating:	reset 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
7.95/10.00 (2 votes)

Homepage:
http://www.beonex.com/communicator/
Tar/BZ2:
http://www.beonex.com/communicator/version/0.8/install/unix/
Changelog:
http://www.beonex.com/communicator/version/0.8/new.html

Trove categories: [change]

[Development Status]		5 - Production/Stable
[Environment]		Win32 (MS Windows), X11 Applications
[Intended Audience]		End Users/Desktop
[License]		OSI Approved :: Mozilla Public License (MPL)
[Operating System]		Microsoft :: Windows, Microsoft :: Windows :: Windows 95/98/ME, Microsoft :: Windows :: Windows NT/2000/XP, POSIX :: Linux
[Programming Language]		C++, JavaScript
[Topic]		Communications :: Chat :: Internet Relay Chat, Communications :: Email :: Email Clients (MUA), Communications :: Usenet News, Internet :: File Transfer Protocol (FTP), Internet :: Finger, Internet :: WWW/HTTP :: Browsers, Text Processing :: Markup :: HTML/XHTML

Dependencies: [change]
No dependencies filed

 Branches

Branch	Version	Last release	License	URLs
Default Intended for end-users.	0.8-stable	06-Jun-2002	Mozilla Public License (MPL)
Development	0.7-dev-2	06-Aug-2001	Mozilla Public License (MPL)

 Comments

[»] Mozilla with a different name?
by jo - Aug 6th 2001 12:03:30

Can someone tell me what's different between this package and straight up Mozilla?

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Thomas R. Koll - Aug 7th 2001 05:50:07

Beonex Communicator has some special features which are especially interesting for individuals concerned about privacy and for enterprises.
...
Unlike Mozilla, Beonex Communicator is made for users, not developers. I think they allready described it good enough. Personally I favor Mozilla because it's developed faster than Beonex

--
19-year-old geek from south-east Bavaria, Germany, can be found in #oswd and #linux-ger at irc.openprojects.net or in #gimp at irc.gimp.org V pna ernq gung phm V'z a trrx

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by jo - Aug 17th 2001 01:50:13

Yeah, I saw that text but it still doesn't answer my question. What exactly are those features? What does "made for users, not developers." mean? How is Mozilla not for users?


>
> Beonex Communicator has some special
> features which are especially
> interesting for individuals concerned
> about privacy and for enterprises.
> ...
> Unlike Mozilla, Beonex Communicator is
> made for users, not developers.
>
> I think they allready described it
> good enough.
> Personally I favor Mozilla because
> it's developed faster than Beonex


[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Thomas R. Koll - Aug 18th 2001 06:26:04


> Yeah, I saw that text but it still
> doesn't answer my question. What exactly
> are those features? What does "made for
> users, not developers." mean? How is
> Mozilla not for users? the beonex developer say it's not for user but I'm sure that the Mozilla staff sez the opposite.


--
19-year-old geek from south-east Bavaria, Germany, can be found in #oswd and #linux-ger at irc.openprojects.net or in #gimp at irc.gimp.org V pna ernq gung phm V'z a trrx

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Beonex - Aug 18th 2001 08:14:59


> the beonex developer say it's not for
> user but I'm sure that the Mozilla staff
> sez the opposite.
Mozilla releases page <http://www.mozilla.org/releases/>, frist sentence:
> We make binary versions of of Mozilla available for testing purposes only!.
> We provide no end user support.

The difference is polish and higher security. We'll put up a FAQ sometime with details about the differences of Mozilla and Beonex Commincator.

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by jo - Jan 1st 2002 09:46:36


>
> % the beonex developer say it's not
> for
> % user but I'm sure that the Mozilla
> staff
> % sez the opposite.
>
>
> Mozilla releases page
> <http://www.mozilla.org/releases/>,
> frist sentence:
> > We make binary versions of of
> Mozilla available for testing purposes
> only!.
> > We provide no end user support.
>
> The difference is polish and higher
> security. We'll put up a FAQ sometime
> with details about the differences of
> Mozilla and Beonex Commincator.

cool - look forward to it (still) :-)

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Beonex - Jan 1st 2002 11:51:56


> We'll put up a FAQ sometime
> with details about the differences of
> Mozilla and Beonex Commincator.

Done

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Beonex - May 11th 2002 22:30:54


> Can someone tell me what's different
> between this package and straight up
> Mozilla?

See the Beonex vs. Mozilla page.

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by MST - Jul 23rd 2002 07:15:42

The fact that mozilla site says their browser is for testing only, does not make any recompile automatically "more polished".

This is the only actual info I found:

* Browser o No revealing "Referrer" o Cookies are deleted at shutdown o Certain invasive JavaScript commands disabled o Lots of minor tweaks

Well, this does not seem like much ... Running Beonex and mozilla side by side I don't really see a difference on my Celeron 400.




>
> % Can someone tell me what's different
> % between this package and straight up
> % Mozilla?
>
>
> See the Beonex vs. Mozilla page.


[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Beonex - Jul 23rd 2002 09:34:59


> The fact that mozilla site says their
> browser is for testing only, does not
> make any recompile automatically "more
> polished".
"Polish" means "lots of minor tweaks, each on their own too small to mention, but significant in the sum". And Beonex *is* more polished compared to Mozilla.


> This is the only actual info I found: [...]
> Well, this does not seem like much ...
You completely missed the point. It's not so much about the code difference, but the purpose. Please read the beginning of the doc again.


>Running Beonex and mozilla side by side I don't really see
> a difference on my Celeron 400.
Beonex Communicator Linux is being compiled with a much better compiler and better flags than the mozilla.org builds. Many people have reported that Beonex Communicator is faster. I don't use mozilla.org's builds myself, nor did I do structured tests, so I have no experience on my own.

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Beonex - Jul 23rd 2002 10:08:24


> nor did I do structured tests Actually, I did, about a year ago. See the gory details at the -O2-bug.

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Mozilla with a different name?
by Helge Stenstrom - Sep 29th 2004 07:38:47


>

> % Can someone tell me what's different

> % between this package and straight up

> % Mozilla?

>

>

> See the Beonex vs. Mozilla page.


I think there is a risk that Beonex Communicator is confused with Netscape Communicator. It wouldn't surprise me if Communicator was registered as a trademark by Netscape (I haven't checked).

Why not use a more generic term, like Beonex Internet Explorer?


[reply] [top]

---

[»] Beonex name
by Beonex - Sep 29th 2004 07:45:22

> It wouldn't surprise me if
> Communicator was registered as a
> trademark by Netscape (I haven't checked).

Well, I did check with them, and they said it isn't. Compare Nokia Communicator.

> Why not use a more generic term, like
> Beonex Internet Explorer?

"Internet Explorer" is pretty sure to be a trademark (in contrast to "Explorer" alone, which isn't, at least per German court rulings).

[reply] [top]

---

[»] Re: Beonex name
by Helge Stenstrom - Sep 30th 2004 03:49:38


> > It wouldn't surprise me if

> > Communicator was registered as a

> > trademark by Netscape (I haven't

> checked).

>

> Well, I did check with them, and they

> said it isn't. Compare Nokia

> Communicator.

>

> > Why not use a more generic term, like

> > Beonex Internet Explorer?

>

> "Internet Explorer" is pretty sure to be

> a trademark (in contrast to "Explorer"

> alone, which isn't, at least per German

> court rulings).


No, it isn't. It was once, but an american court has decided that it's a generic term. That's why e.g. Microsoft can use it for their browser. So can you. Never will you see in a Microsoft advert, that Internet Explorer is a trademark.


[reply] [top]

---

[»] RE: Binaries and platforms
by David Zeitler - Dec 10th 2000 08:22:57

It works fine on my K6-3 which is pentium class. Certainly better than the Netscape 6 stuff that I've never been able to get to download and work on any Linux platform.

[reply] [top]

[»] Re: problems with binaries and platforms
by Beonex - Dec 8th 2000 00:02:28

> it works even less on my colleague's Athlon

Actually, it is compiled on an AMD Duron.

[reply] [top]

[»] problems with binaries and platforms
by Moritz Barsnick - Dec 7th 2000 05:45:13

Thanks for this project. Unfortunately, binaries are only delivered for i686, which (really) doesn't work on my Pentium (&quot;I&quot;). On the other hand, it works even &quot;less&quot; on my colleague's Athlon, which is supposed to be i686 compatible.

[reply] [top]