@Bernd_afa: OWB (68k) optimizations

[unusedunused]

If I don't go wrong, you have the sources of OWB (68k) made by joerg strohmayer.
You keep saying it is un-optimized, that it doesn't have threads, etc...
Well, improve it, give it threads; after you have "optimized it", someone else might give it a full "native" MUI interface.

The source is outdate and OWB core is change much since some years.If you wish i can send you the source(write PN) or ask Jörg.but you can nothing do with it.its way toooo slow and too old.the OWB team have also speedup it

on AROS can see, OWB is slow, i dont believe it is faster on MOS or OS4, because Cairo cost too more performance.,OWB have no diskcache.On netsurf they are working on diskcache.

Its always good to wait instead spend much work, maybe the red versus blue war end in 1-2 years and working together is better possible of the few existing amiga devs

I need not sell a OS more by have a good browser, so i need not spend much time, i can wait some years so things go faster and browers get better portable and chrome enhance.

Sooner or later i buy a 4 core I5 or I7 then compiling get lots faster, then maybe at least the compile time of this slow C++ monsters is acceptable and i have fun to do it

[unusedunused]

Sorry, but this is mostly wrong. Sure WebKit isn't as fast as ibrowse (what a surprise), but it's still *much* faster than NetSurf on the same machine

If OWB is faster, then wy netsurf is a google summer of Code projecrt since 2 years and there is no OWB Version in a Linux distri ?.the big disadvantage of netsurf is currently missung java script but its in Linux Distri.

netsurf is in Linux distri.Wy not OWB ?

http://www.drobe.co.uk/article.php?id=2041

maybe the time of render of a complete page is slower or same as OWB, but thats not the important.The important is to get the page as fast as possible vissible and can scroll and click on links.

netsurf have some settings for number of fetchers and the time it refresh.Here users can tweak in config file and get better results on

>On that Xeon PC/Linux I use for crosscompilation, it needs about 30 minutes to compile >OWB from scratch

That sound good.You have 2 core and how many GHZ your system have ?

then i can assume that a Core I7 with 2,66 GHZ can maybe compile it in 12 minutes ?

I have too some time ago compile OWB on my AMD64 3000+
I have compile it 70% sucessfull, but most demotivation was that every time when i type make, the build system check for about over 1 minute to find out on what files it should continue to compile and then it give me a compile error when something is wrong.my ram was enough.

and for that i have not the patience.In this time a netsurf rebuild work and when i change some files in netsurf, a new version can get in 5 sec and a compile error in this file can see in 2 sec.
maybe that slowdown is cygwin relatet ?
when you change a file in OWB on your Linux System, how many seconds it need to detect what file need compile.

>And my OWB port (and also OS4 one) is also *much* faster to scroll on my Peg2 than on >a Xeon 2.5GHz machine under linux with the plain OWB SDL version.

Yes that i believe, but the Reason is, because SDL not support good OWB.OWB use SW_SURFACE and so scroll is done in CPU.

netsurf too use in old versions cpu for scroll, but newest source Version use now SDL to scroll and on HW surface it use the blitter.and as can see in netsurf thread here, its lots faster now when the Pixel format fit ok.

here is the source can easy see  in the diff output

http://source.netsurf-browser.org/trunk/libnsfb/src/frontend_sdl.c?r1=9719&r2=9720

[unusedunused]

Why would it be any indication of anything whether something is in specific linux distribution or not?

thats show its intresting for users to use.The fact that OWB is not available in enhanced way for other than MOS OS4 /AROS and is also not listet on wikipedia, do not motivate me for OWB.The only running OWB i can see is on AROS.and here it is 2-3* slower to show the page as soon as possible.

there are lots of browser out you can see too, maybe there are some better browsers here,and thats the reason wy there is no OWB Version in distri.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_browser

I dont want spend much work for a better than nothing solution, i want the best solution, so that when i surf on winuae its same fast as on firefox native.and that is possible with netsurf.and when they add the filecache, then it go faster.

sure java script is miss, and OWB is for MOS OS4 AROS users great, because better wait 5 sec instead of cant show page.but when i see that the page is show on 2 sec(the page layout is done and can scroll) on my windows box with all browsers, i think its not usefull to spend lots work in OWB before the speed get same as other browsers.

>That's your opinion. I don't agree. Personally I like to have working javascript.

I like too have Java script and problem of later show on OWB have nothing to do with Java script.I deactivate it for test in AROS OWB, but get not faster.

>Such things should be automatic. The end user should not be forced to bother with such >things.

but i dont see if that is on OWB and other browsers do something automatic.current browsers are design that they run ok on a System with at least 600 MHZ.and do a rerender every 0.5 sec

When a system is slower then the rerender should be not so often, to slow not too much down.

often rerender increase the full Page load time.
and here its clear wy OWB can show a page faster complete as other browsers.because OWB show the page the first time later as other browsers.

but its always more usefull to show a page as soon as the full text is load and all layout data is here.

then a user can begin read the page, scroll, or click on links.
so in praxis the browser is faster to use, even if the full page load(upto the last promotion banner is load)take longer.

I like want a browse rthat show a page first after 3 sec and if he load the page in 12 sec full i think its lots better as a browser that show the page first after 6 sec and show full in 9 sec.

[unusedunused]

>Bernd, you can start cross-compiling all the libraries required by OWB; it's certainly less >work for you, then Fab or another guy (Artur? ), can cross-compile Owb.

If somebody want port it, i help.
but i do no work, when nobody want do something.he can also try himself to compile Cairo.
 
because software grow and when its really need and begin then too port, you get a more upto date version.

and BTW, somebody who is intresting on Port to 68k,  have fab and me ask about OWB, he install now amidevcpp and want it do in cygwin.i send him my full includes compilers with all libs i have.

and here are most libs in OWB need.

[unusedunused]

>Huh? So you seriously think just because there's software X in linux distros it somehow >measures popularity of that said software?

there are also some patches for windows/linux and OWB old versions, but nobody do actual OWB release for that system.

if so, i can maybe install a small linux on vmware and test OWB here in compare with Linux netsurf.

and btw, can you tell me page times, and links where OWB is faster ?
I see the video from Fab, here the load time of full page was good, but the time the page was show first and can scroll, was much longer as on netsurf and other browsers.this cant be problem of internet, because in this early stage very few data is need from Internet.

you should not test the old Netsurf for MOS on reuters or some other page.because this old Versions have Bug that redraw is done too often when there is a image skip delay > 1 sec.thats fix in newer versions 68k have but MOS not.

>If u compile the libraries, maybe someone else is awaiting just this; open-source is NOT a >one-man job (at least in linux world  )

>I gave up because my amiga programming knowledge is too limited.

amiga programming knowledge is mostly not need.you need Unix ccmake and C++ knowledge and much patience.

>The reasons for AROS OWB slowness were explained already.

You mean because of SDL ?

a browser is simple written, it render the page in ram with CPU commands.so the time the page is show first is same.maybe the transfer to GFX Card is in SDL only 4 fps but still here 4 fps are 0,25 sec, and we talk about several seconds that OWB show the page later as other browser.

also i see OWB on AROS show same fast as netsurf the whole page.but netsurf or other browser show 2-3* sooner the page.so i think its OWB dependent.

I dont know how can MOS version be faster.

using webkit is ok, but the trick is use it in best way asynchron and here it seem the OWBAL have some Problems.

So wy not accept this and report that Problem in OWB ML to discuss instead say OWB is fast and great ?

the result can only be a better OWB and it get more attractive and then come upto date Linux builds maybe.That OWB have no diskcache all browser have is also a Limit.

[unusedunused]

>Your benchmark methods are flawed I guess. You really ought to rule out internet >connectivity issues from your tests. Free hint: Use local copies of web pages you test.

I test too with cache proxy.but i get that not faster.
But your idea is good, maybe there is somewhere a benchmark HTML Page that can run from Harddrive and we can use for profiling browsers ?

I still dont understand wy OWB on 68k/ AROS need so much time to show a page without images.he need only load the main file parse and render it.

>Yet, it's still much faster than what i could get from netsurf (both MorphOS and current >68k version).

Is there on MOS a CPU throttle Software ?.I guess when you throttle your CPU that it is only 100 MHZ fast, then you notice too that OWB is lots slower.

When caches are small no 2. Level cache is here it slowdown more.
Maybe somebody can show a pageload on a efika at http://www.reuters.com or a file of that ?

I think with such a system you notice more the diffrence between OWB and netsurf.

I never see a fast C++ Program.dont forget C++ need lots of Overhead often copy data and this need larger caches.also using cairo increase cache misses.

and thats the reason that the CPU developers notice that a Cache > 1 Megabyte still give some speedup-

look at memory usage of OWB, thats another problem.it use lots mem.much more as netsurf.

[unusedunused]

>Plus, I don't understand why u shouldn't believe Fab when he says that his MOS version >is faster than AROS one ?

I see this video from Fab when load http://www.cnn.com and with AROS OWB i get same times(7-8 sec) to show page first.safari/chrome is lots faster around 2-3 sec.netsurf on my winuae need 4-5 sec.not optimal, but better as OWB on AROS, netsurf Team is working to add a cache.I think when its done, netsurf is speed up.

http://fabportnawak.free.fr/vids/cnn.mpg

sure he tell situation is not optimal, but normaly i think when doing a vídeo before first try once and then do it again to see if time is same and reproducable.and when his OWB really is so fast as firefox or other windows webkit browsers, then its clear notice if a browser need 2-3 sec to show a page or 7 sec.

Also you can see on Video, he do no reload.he type the name in, its possible that there is something on cache.

>Sorry, Bernd, Owb is not meant for real A4000 machines; owb 68k target are solutions >like this one: http://xamiga.net/ on a modern PC.

but still, it run slower because of slow internet,OWB load too much data from internet before he begin to show the page.also when press the page back button the load of the last page is same slow as a full load.this i see on 68k OWB and AROS OWB.

normaly when press page back the page is show in around 0,5 sec complete.On netsurf some pages are show fast some not, but as netsurf Team told teh cache is currently broken and is rewritten to do disk caching too.

>compile just the libraries, then Fab (if he wants) or others interested can cross-compile >owb.

Have you ask zero hero if he compile Cairo ?.Here are lots of libs for 68k

http://megacz.back2roots.org/portsbttr.html

I currently have more fun to enhance stormwizard to have same nice GUI look as MUI/zune programs.I get ok from Haage&Partner that i am allowed to enhance it and latest source from Alinea on 12.09 to release the lib and the GUI Editor for free.

I do the enhance with frameiclass so all OS or GUI Patches that support this frame types can get nicer system conform look and it depend on the prefs of the system and wizard library need no Skin preferences.

AFA use zune/MUI render features for frameiclass

Only not good Limit i must accept, the wizard source can not go opensource and i can not give it to other people and its currently not allow to make a AROS or MOS native Version.but lets see what the future bring, when the red versus blue war end, maybe the Limits change.

#define FRAME_DEFAULT      0
#define FRAME_BUTTON      1
#define FRAME_RIDGE      2
#define FRAME_ICONDROPBOX   3
4 is the prop container and 5 prob knob.OS4 support that too(See sdk)
what stormwizard GUI System is you can see on aminet(it currently not work) when you search for storm Wizard.

Here is a screenshot how Arteffect look on AFA with new wizard.library

http://www.daten-transport.de/?id=tBqry9fq5tF4

[unusedunused]

>as i said many times already os4 version of owb doesnt usually feel slower than os4 port >of netsurf. i believe the opposite is the case.

here you should bring time values.maybe OS4 netsurf is slower as 68k netsurf.

when use cnn page

after what time netsurf/ OWB on OS4 show the page first ?
and then the time netsurf 68k do.best is test 3 times

You have a PC, maybe you can compare AROS OWB and OS4 OWB.
OS4 OWB is not so enhanced as MOS OWB

But when MOS OWB is faster as OS4 OWB, then there should some values here.there was some OS4 MOS compare benchmarks, but no OWB compare benchmarks.

OWB on both system is able to render page from file, or maybe use a cache proxy.

sure i know best is when i test that on a MOS system, but i really dont want buy a MOS able System to see that there are no wonders possible

>What's the problem with Cairo ?

I dont know, i have not compile it.there is a AROS version from 2006 nobody use.and now when somebody really need cairo, he need the newest version, maybe here is change something.Or where is the source for MOS Cairo

Cairo is a backend and i think it need some platform dependent graphic stuff.

But i remember when firefox change to Cairo render it get too slower.I think best is use SDL and fix teh scroll problem by using HWsurface and sdl blit command.

maybe that give a speedboost and fewer memory usage on efika

[unusedunused]

>Or find someone else to compile it. Do u know other 68k devs, besides Artur, who can do >it?

as i told zero_hero can do it,
also amistuff can do it, diegocr and many i forget.

i think on 68k there are more devs that can do it.But there seem no perfect browser for amiga currently here.

the browser thats done on MOS or OS4 are done from the OS Developers.On a commercial  OS its important to have a better than nothing solution as fast as possible to sell more systems.

but developers that develop for fun, want do something better usefull or when they get money(see AROS Port)

And as can see, for 68k there are no bounties or something else as on AROS or OS4 or MOS.

[unusedunused]

>more hands are better than >one.

yes thats right and so i think there should more working together to bring a perfect browser.

if the MOS OWB is really faster, then maybe somebody add the enhancements to AROS or add it in the Main OWB Core.

and when i then see it work same fast as other browsers, then i am more motivate to compile it for 68k.

I need not hurry up, and can wait and look whats happen in 1 year if it is then more easy possible to port OWB.

>Fab already said MOS OWB is faster. I say: let's trust his words.

Fab is a Morph OS Developer.
When you ask the Microsoft Browser Developers, i think he answer too that Internet explorer is fastest ;-)

And same is with the Apple Safari Developers i think. ;-)

But i can test IE and Safari and notice that Safari is faster.

>Fab asked no money in order to do it.
Yes, but we not know if he get money from MOS sells.

that he accept no bounty can also better Marketing.

Or what do you think when Apple/MS make a browser that miss since some years the importants things as a download progress bar and more.
and there is on Apple/MS Homepage a button for bounty ?

>Do u want to be paid ? Is this the "problem" ?

No, i dont want paid, i want fun on coding and something i can use myself.netsurf i can use on some pages currently, but AROS OWB is too slow to use for me.I test on vmware and Icaros.

I like more the AROS Version because it use no Cairo and is a MUI class.So browser can use with every application.and because its a class there is possible to build a amiblitz GUI for example.

because i use winuae i can use windows browsers until the browser situation in amiga land look better.maybe MOS OWB get as MUI class some day.then its more easy portable

maybe somebody add the libcss/libhtml of netsurf to aweb or so.

so before spend lots work, better wait.netsurf is here and because its written not in C++ it can be more easy get faster, it can be much faster compile etc.

I have program a peephole Optimizer for amiblitz and i know also what much additional code the CPU on C++ must execute, to run this nice OO code.

Many developers that use C++ dont know anything abput how a CPU work, they never start a profiler or have any glue how fast a 1 GHZ CPU can be.

for example.with a 50 MHZ 68060 you can compile perfect paint complete (source have 60000 lines in amiblitz in 12 sec.then you can start it and after load 4 sec later it show the main window.

so i really dont understand wy a page that contain some text and parse some 200 lines of html code on a classic need over 18 sec show.

[unusedunused]

>Also, I'm not sure what you are referring to about missing download progress, but i hope >you don't refer to my port.

I mean not your Port, i know MOS and AROS OWB have a download progress bar.

>MOS OWB is *already* a MUI application (AFAIK).

I mean that OWB is a class, simular to the MUI HTML class, but of course can show all.
Then its possible to add code easy that simple Mail and YAM can show Mails in HTML too.

but because simple Mail and Yam is a multiplatform AOS Program that run on 68k MOS OS4 AROS, it does not help when in amigaland no working together is possible and every side do their own browser.

[unusedunused]

>About the class, it's certainly something nice to have, but I think the current AROS class >crashes if there's more than one opener, which is a bit limiting.  

the bounty rule is say it should work.if you know a problem in design, you should report it.when it not work, its also not possible when run 2 or more OWB at same time.

[unusedunused]

Actually, I didn't say MorphOS OWB was faster than OS4 OWB. They're roughly the same .

If you see no diffrence, then MOS OWB have same Problem.Here can too read from 2 OS4 dev that OWB load much of the page.try also the link on MOS OWB

other browsers need not so much load before a page is usable(mean scrollable/movable)

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30292&forum=32#526721

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30292&forum=32#526765

this page reload in 1-2 sec on windows browsers.need test how long it take on AROS.

>When page cache is enabled, it obviously displays in a fraction of second, if the page is >still in cache.

And how can enable this, so i can check in AROS/68k sources ?

[unusedunused]

>You sound like a broken record.

i must post only facts because told MOS OWB is fast as other browsers.

It does not help to make things better or attract more Users to Amiga OS NG Systems when all is tell great, and features that are miss, is tell they are not need.there arte lots other sytems out that offer this features.and thats maybe the main Reason wy AOS have since all this years not at least 5000 Users from the several Million Users Amiga have in the past.

such a strategie can only work in a Monopol World, but Amiga have no Monopol.

maybe when all work together OWB can get equal in compare to other browser, and all users save time when then surf

[unusedunused]

>There's a difference between speed and responsivity, but that must be too subtle for you,

I know that, but when you read th second post, he write that OWB on OS4 is too responsive.

""""
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30292&forum=32#526731

I have to say that isn't true. I can click on links, scroll, etc while it is still loading some images (and maybe other stuff). But it does seem to need to load a lot of the page first, before rendering
"""

As soon OWB on 68k or AROS show the page the first time it is responsive, at least with a delay of 200 ms.but until OWB show a page it need much more time than other browsers.

when i try 5 times to reload cnn on safari and get times to first show of 2-3 sec and then try with OWB and  AROS and then i need 7-8sec then its a huge noticable diffrence.