Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: Sphinx_Ra on August 08, 2003, 10:50:06 PM
-
We think the Amizilla project is a great effort,
all kind of company's have already donated some
fee to encourage programmers to port this great
browser to AmigaOS/MOS.
On the Amizilla site, you can view who donated
how much money, offcourse there has been a anouncement that some linux browser will be ported to morphos, witch is great, but what about Amizilla, doesn't Amiga Inc or Genesi have any interest for this project.
From the Amiga Inc. side we understand there
isn't that much money to spend but couldn't genesi send some fee ?????
-
Genesi has an interest but it has yet to be revealed...
-
Amiga Inc have already stated that they are not interested in supporting the developement of a browser that would run on MorphOS. They have web technologies expected to be delivered in OS4.1->4.2.. This included basic HTML and Javascript support. With those technologies, it is assume someone else will build a browser useing those components.
Such as Aweb? or IBrowse?
I think fleecy may have said this in one of the interview thingos he does at Amigaworld.net
-
They have web technologies expected to be delivered in OS4.1->4.2.. This included basic HTML and Javascript support. With those technologies, it is assume someone else will build a browser useing those components.
The new HTML services should already make it into 4.1. The support will be more than just "basic", and will include things like XHTML, XML, JavaScript, CSS and DOM.
-
Cool, Is it gonna be built from existing code or from scratch.
-
Cool, Is it gonna be built from existing code or from scratch.
We'll not be re-inventing the wheel ;-)
-
Rogue wrote:
Cool, Is it gonna be built from existing code or from scratch.
We'll not be re-inventing the wheel ;-)
kHTML based it is then! ;-)
-
Rogue wrote:
The new HTML services should already make it into 4.1. The support will be more than just "basic", and will include things like XHTML, XML, JavaScript, CSS and DOM.
That sounds cool. I was looking into using XML in a project I'm working on, what kind of XML support will there be for programmers? Will there be things to help with syntax checking?
-
I was looking into using XML in a project I'm working on, what kind of XML support will there be for programmers? Will there be things to help with syntax checking?
There's a shared library that copes with parsing XML files. It is based on expat (the same parser that is used by mozilla), and offers both a tree-based API (read an XML file into memory and access individual elements) as well as an event based API ("Hey, someone just wrote ").
-
How is the project coming along? Has any developers jumped on the Amizilla train? If not, is there a "deadline" for when the booty is re-paid to the donators?
Edit:
Just found the Yahoo Group and it looks like some people have started coding. Neat!
-
I heard that there were seven people actually coding.
--gary_c
-
I would prefer microsoft internet explorer to mozzila. :-) :-o
-
amigamad wrote:
I would prefer microsoft internet explorer to mozzila. :-) :-o
I wouldn't.
I don't find it very good at all, in fact, I hardly ever use it, exept for sites that refuse to show up on anything else ( :destroy: ), and I usually end up crashing it :-|
Can't say that I use Mozilla a lot either, though, Firebird and Thunderbird do everything for me.
I really like the idea of the web elements that are to be included in OS4, and if they *are* KHTML based, I would have no problem with that at all :-)
-
Internet Explorer can't even, after 10 years of development, resume a download. This makes it useless.
-
KennyR wrote:
Internet Explorer can't even, after 10 years of development, resume a download. This makes it useless.
It can. But only if the other end suppports resume.
-
amigamad wrote:
I would prefer microsoft internet explorer to mozzila. :-) :-o
ok. it's official. you're insane :-o
almost anything is better than that Piece of S**T exploder.
:-D
mozzila and various linux browsers aren't quite as fast as Opera, but are much nicer to use than IE.
the only problem with the linux version of Opera is that it turns off suddenly every once in a while. wierd!
but the windows version (6.05) is stable.
-
Internet Explorer can't even, after 10 years of development, resume a download. This makes it useless.
It can. But only if the other end suppports resume.
I've never managed to get IE 4,5 or 6 to resume any download from any site, even ftp. Opera, Mozilla, IBrowse, Voyager, AWeb, Lynx, wget and Konqueror managed it though.
-
ok. it's official. you're insane
It was my joke of course it would be goood to have a top name browser myself i use opera . :-) :-D
-
Thanks for the kind words about the AmiZilla Initative Sphinx_Ra. You can find out the status of the project anytime by going to the mailinglist (Hope you can read code) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amizilla/ or the sourceforge website http://sourceforge.net/projects/amizilla
Want a quick summery? Seven coders are working hard on the project.
-
It can. But only if the other end suppports resume.
Just about every server does, these days, but I've only gotten file resume to work once or twice. What IE actually does is salvage the file from your cache folder and resume that.
First of all, IE almost never does that properly, so resuming files is notoriously unreliable. Second, you can't save a partially downloaded file like you can with a real download manager, so there's no way to MAKE it work reliably, or even work with a partial download (which can be better than nothing).
The real kicker is, the Mac version of IE comes with a download manager, while the PC doesn't. Explain that, Microsoft.
-
The nice thing with Explorer that there are many asshole webadmins making IE only sites. The problem lies in that there are a thousand IE variants, sometimes even under the same version number - using the same version numbered english, french, hungarian browser behaves differently. Not to mention the differences between the Win and Mac Internet Explorer. Not to mention that IE has some hair raising design faults, so you will have a tremendous list of things to avoid if you want your code/html to display/run well in IE.
Internet Explorer is a nightmare.
-
Waccoon wrote:
It can. But only if the other end suppports resume.
First of all, IE almost never does that properly, so resuming files is notoriously unreliable. Second, you can't save a partially downloaded file like you can with a real download manager, so there's no way to MAKE it work reliably, or even work with a partial download (which can be better than nothing).
The real kicker is, the Mac version of IE comes with a download manager, while the PC doesn't. Explain that, Microsoft.
The Mac version of IE is crud, Sure, it has a download manager, but it's next to useless, and will not resume unless it's an FTP file.
I don't honestly get what you are going on about. I'm here, at the weekend I was listening to the MP3s from amiwest and am on Dialup here with 2 hour cut-outs. When I lost the connection I just had to reconnect and IE 6 would resume OK. I could even listen to the file as I was downloading it.
-
Hmm expat.
One of the fastest, but I as far as I remember it doesn't support DOM (maybe I just worked with some old version). I had more pleasure with xerces. I guess these are both GPL based parsers ...
re
Treke
-
mdma wrote:
kHTML based it is then! ;-)
If indeed it is based on KHTML or more specifically Apple's webobjects I'll be a happy bunny.
I love safari, it's a fast, compact, yet fully standards compatible browser. I can't believe I ever used IE or Moz.
My only concern is the same when adding technologies from elsewhere into AOS, is will this be implemented in the Amiga way, or will we start having to use /etc drawers and be editing textfile after textfile.
-
amigamad wrote:
ok. it's official. you're insane
It was my joke of course it would be goood to have a top name browser myself i use opera . :-) :-D
i figured you were joking - which is why i felt ok to call you "insane" (we're family here). anyway, i wanted to throw out more good words about Opera! :-D
-
:-D Helloooooo !!!!
Thanks for the reply's,
sorry i didn't could join the
comments i was partying
the hole weekend long :-)
and offcourse a lot of :pint: :-)
-
This three API you speak of, is it DOM compliant? I was looking at writing a DOM implementation in C++ under an MIT licence... Might still, if i can be bothered to get off my arse and do something about it :)...
-
@Cecilia: "anyway, i wanted to throw out more good words about Opera!"
You can't say any more - Opera is God's gift to Windows. The sooner we get the Opera people to go back to making an Amiga version, the sooner we'll get a proper browser.
tony
-
@tonyw
Opera would be more than willing to but for a price tag that's a bit more than is warranted at this time.
Remember, that's how they make their money, pay-to-port.
-
Opera had quite a bit of potential at one time; however, with the introduction of version 6, they've really dropped the ball. It takes too long to start, too long to load a webpage, and the layout of the U/I is just horrendous. I'de sooner take whatever the "pay to port" price tag is and apply it to Voyager and/or Ibrowse.
Now that is my opinion alone, and has nothing to do with anyone else. Yet, with that said, any and all browsers for our platform(s) need serious upgrades. Of that, there is no question. In other words, I wouldn't turn my nose up at an Opera port if it were available now, but I am also not going to cry if Opera goes out of business either.
-
opera is slower starting up since 6 but it is still the best browser i have ever used .ill try a nbewer version of mozzila sometime to see if it has improved.