Timberwolf Progress Update

[unusedunused]

Hooligan

You are completely wrong in what you are saying. FF 4 port could attract new users. How this can be denied is beyond me.. obviously nothing "commercial" will come from the platform.. (and by "commercial" i think you mean "industrial" )

I dont think that the friedens are able to make a really usable and stable firefox, same as other platforms have.they can maybe hold some more OS4 Fans  by giving hope of a firefox.OS4 is far behind, and when there was not the big firefox announce, then only OS4 OWB can not hold users on OS4 i think.

I never see from the friedens a rock solid and complete program or game Port mainted they do in their free time.Can you tell me 1 ?

on amigaworld this was explain more.here is a link.

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=29160&forum=2&start=40&viewmode=flat&order=0#499600

the friedens begin before OWB silent a firefox port(the amizilla was opensource and work too a little), it work a little on OS4, they fail to get it stable, and Andrea take over firefox.He fail too to make it stable and he deicde to do OWB.

then we can see since OWB for MOS have more features as OS4 OWB, suddenly they do a big announce that a firefox should come and collect money for it.

but i see this only as a poker trick, so people inverst money in OS4 instead of other systems.

now it seem near 2 years ago and OS4 still have no stable working firefox Port.

and if somebody announce alone a closed source firefox is not very good moral.many people have spend work in firefox, that it is easy portable to other platforms for free.the amizilla sources were here
I dont know any other than friedens that make out of this firefox work a closed source ripoff

If the friedens can compile it since long time, but it not run stable show me that something is bad in OS4 or are not able to do that.if a OS dev really like to use a firefox on his OS and decide to do a Port, it cant take so long time in compileable but unstable phase.

I only see in my experience, when can compile a Unix program, it run normaly stable.

remember, those portable programs are written, to use very few OS functions, so there need not much functions for AOS add.

remember also.this programs are written that a user can compile the program and when it compile the user can be sure, that the program work in same way stable as on other platforms.

but when you look on OS4 you see always long develop time.

remember how fast Blender for MOS was here and if i remember correct MOS have a actual 2.5 blender now.

On OS4 dev go slow and blender is old.
same happen with firefox.

so wy should OS4 attract non OS4 Fans, when they have no actual firefox...
I see the OS4 firefox only as a teaser that users leave not OS4 and spend money in other systems.....

EDIT:

I write this post with a firefox 5 Final.I update it some weeks.i dont see wy i should use firefox 4.firefox 5 is tell as faster....

EDIT2:

and if a actual port can not do with a simple new compile, or in at least 1-2 hours of work, then the Port is really bad.
and this happen on very much OS4 Ports, so no OS4 user can simple compile newest sources and it work stable.So many OS4 Ports are outdate.
The updates of Linux distributions, are not done from developers, they are done from users, or automatic

when see the MOS OWB, this is a good port, because it can update to newest webkit core.
and when remember MOS OWB is much more amiga specific as timberwolf and also MOS have much less Unix in core as OS4.
So in theory OS4 port must be faster, but it seem the opposite is true

[unusedunused]

Come on guys give them a break, they are working on peanuts to try and bring a much needed app/feature to their chosen platform.

now the friedens try to get firefox run for OS4 overall since 5-6 years.How much years should wait now for a stable firefox ?

I dont know anyone that want port firefox that have need such a long time to make a alpha Version stable.

its easy to make a working alpha firefox out of the amizilla sources and announce.nspr ist not change since years.but sure now that the friedens want do their own firefox, wy should another continue work on amizilla.that the friedens can catch the work and get the money...
amizilla have problem to debug, and i am sure with enhanced ixemul thread safe, all can work better.but i do not try it.I really hate when there is no working together possible, and double work is need.

same is with the open office announces for OS4.

but the guys on other AOS are too brave to announce such a thing when they dont know if they can really reach the goal in acceptable time alone

But i think when other AOS announce nice things, then the OS4 announce more nicer things.

for example what happen with Real 3d and candy factory or Dopus magellan on OS4 ?
all this stuff was in the early days a hope that OS4 is better than other AOS, so more see hope in OS4 and spend money in OS4 instead of other AOS.

I see in OS4 lots of the opensource code, is make close source for OS4, but on other hand OS4 devs can  look and or use AROS code or other code.

parts in OS4 that are opensource and make close source are newlib, Cairo, Python, firefox.

I think without OS4, in amiga land is lots better working together possible and other developers produce better OS features for the given money as the OS4 devs.and this help the amiga to attracht more user, if a AOS have more features and does not cost so much money.

it does not help when lots money flow into a system that is too expensive.

thats same as if you want invest lots money to trainee lame horses, they never can reach any price....

but OS4 survive since long time and get money, the OS4 devs should really really thanks alot that they have such Fans that support them.

[unusedunused]

Well, I provided OWB sources and  gave my help to port it to OS4. And if AROS people are willing to (and that Zune is up to the task), i have no problem doing the same for it.

As for a 68k port, considering the requirements of WebKit, I'm not sure it makes much sense, except for UAE users, but is it really needed? They can just use the browser from the host machine then.

there is also natami here.now 2 more developers get a board.peterk (i guess its peter keuneke)do btw some fpu stuff on winuae and i write some mails with him also with AFA or iconbefast, i dont think that he make vapor announces.so seem natami can get reality.

http://www.natami.net/knowledge.php?b=1¬e=41108

I am a lazy boy, but if there is a browser possible in a few hours for AOS, which can play videos and most site work, i like to use it on winuae.

You have speedup OWB, maybe it is faster now as netsurf.

Can somebody who have MOS OWB and a Peg with 1 GHZ CPU tell what render time this page need ?

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=649724&postcount=146

Can also tell time when page is offline

Here are some values of 68k netsurf and OS4 netsurf on some machines.

@klx300r
>let the whiners whine and the doers do

The problem is the doers do nothing visible.they only do a big hype.A amizilla alpha was here since several years, so whats on OS4 side currently is no progress.

Only the Marketing about firefox have increase alot, since MOS OWB is better than OS4 OWB.

and people as me tell that they think this is only simular as a poker trick.
maybe this motivate the friedens to show that they are really able to do that and do not just simple poker tricks to get more money and users for OS4.

same is real3d and dopus magellan, candy factory, that should come only for OS4, i see that too as simple poker tricks to show users, OS4 have better future, so they buy it

if timberwolf never get to a stable version its waste time.

nobody want use a buggy firefox.and a buggy and old timberwolf does not attract more users i think

And there are many guys that dont like a system that is promote with announces that seems like simple poker tricks.guys think the devs have no morale.and maybe dont want OS4.

For me this many unrealistic announces are a main reason, wy i never ever want use OS4.luckily there are other solutions..
same is  on the X1000 too

Or can you explain wy in dec. 2009 Hyperion want release a full system before summer, and suddenly when the time is over  they call for 100 betatesters that should buy this Hardware with preorder.
wy have they not know that before release 100 betatesters are need to test the Hardware better ?

What do you think ?

on other side, when look on acube, there hardware is slow and expensive, but i think their marketing ok

[unusedunused]

As Piru and many more explained, this is wrong to benchmark this way, but if you want a number, i can give you one anyway. With my not so good inet link, OWB loads the site in about 4 seconds, and reloads in 2 seconds. Of course, i disabled Javascript and Flash to be in the "same" conditions as netsurf.

And let me tell you again, the inet latency in this case *is* important. It might not be that much important on 68k where there's also much more time spent in displaying/parsing/decoding, but once you have a faster machine, inet latency becomes the bottleneck.

Are this test on a Peg 1 GHZ ?

You know, for 68k ixemul is gprof profiler here and you can see in the profile how much inet influence a page have, or what functions cost most time.
Too bad that MOS and OS4 have no gprof, so you can verify better what code cost most time and internet have no influence, the response times of inet access are really fast.

If you think inet access slow down, you can ofcourse do the test and show the page from harddrive.
I know this benchmark is not perfect to compare, but i dont want buy a OS4 system with all hardware and benchmark it myself.

Its always hard from OS4 users to get some benchmark results.And i am not a guy that ask users again and again to make benchmarks.
The results of classic, SAM and pegasus are all from same user done on same day and simular time.so inet access you can compare good.

that inet access is not important in time, you can also see because Pegasos  G4 1 GHZ is 2.3* faster as SAM 667 MHZ with netsurf

this fit the blender benchmark, here Peg is too around 2* faster.And because the G4 have same much better performance /MHZ in the netsurf test and blender test, can be 99% sure inet is no speedbrake.


maybe you have a SDL OWB somewhere that use no Cairo, and can test what values it reach.

because i remember firefox was on my PC very fast, and as soon they add Cairo support it go lots slower.I have a PCIe gforce 6600 Card.so not the slowest.

I hope you not understand my test wrong.I dont want say 68k and SDL is the best system, i only want test with that test, if the port run at optimal speed.

most intresting is for me the speed of Acorn risc OS Version.This use no Cairo too.
maybe here is somebody who can do the test on a Acorn Risc Machine.

@Piru
>Oh wait! Netsurf can't run most of those test because it doesn't do javascript...

this tests have nothing to do with real world pages.No page do extensive java script access or this what the tests test.when i look in profiler, most time cost CSS layout, text and image render.Is there a benchmark here that test CSS layout speed ?

this links are synthetic benchmarks.
same as landmark mips or some else for CPU.

I prefer real world benches on often used pages.
so my test you can see simular to blender speed test.

[unusedunused]

You think the internet connection is working constantly all the time? Are you that uninformed? Latencies can vary from second to second due to multitude of reasons, some client and some server side. Benchmarking page load on live inet connection can never produce any reasonable benchmark results, even if you run the tests minutes apart.


Correlation does not imply causation

This is just one of the fallacies you seem to be blind to.

@Piru

Yes.

I tell the users that they should do every test several times and only if the test result differ not more than 1-2 sec they should use it.

I tell the users to load also a page offline and test speed.

But i always dont understand wy guys only tell this results are total wrong INSTEAD POST values from show the page from ram disk or maybe harddrive.

I can save a page complete, to my 120 GB SSD with sandforce controller.Its fast.
I notice only that 1.1 sec the page need more time to load from inet.

I pay for cheapest DSL 6000 connection, because slower is not cheaper.
But I have a DSL 3000 Connection, because cable is not good for DSL 6000.So my inet is lot slower.

my firefox results are with java enable.so more slow, because more data need load.
I am too lazy to disable it.i stop time until the reload button come again, this indicate on firefox page is complete load.

My results are 2.6 sec load from inet with firefox 5
1.5 sec load from harddrive.

But with faster DSL it get faster so inet time is maybe 0.5- 0.6 sec.

EDIT:

I have now test it too, times are same.

osnews is a fast and constant response server.


>>Is there a benchmark here that test CSS layout speed ?
>Yes.

what test it is ?
maybe it is possible to run on netsurf.

[unusedunused]

@bernd:
i dont know how difficult it is to test with locally saved page? you can even send the same to other users to test to have dependable results. why argue about that all so much?

as i have written before, i tell the users to test it offline but nobody do.I also accept if 68k do the test on internet and the fast platforms can do that with local saved pages.68k SDL Version is over 3* faster, so save internet access does also not help much on other platform i am 99.99% sure.

But fab give me time values of OWB only for inet acces and no time for local saved page.
or are MOS /OS4 browsers not able to save a page local with all images and other stuff ?

only this inet values i get.and here can see that G4 1 GHZ Peg  is around 2* faster as a 667 MHZ SAM, same faster as blender bench, which do btw not load data from internet

So my feeling is, these guys search only for a excuse that ixemul SDL build is not fastest per 100 MHZ, because it doesnt fit the bash without Facts again SDL and ixemul programs some do.also the bash that  68k Compiler produce slow code, seem with that benchmark results wrong, when such a slow small cache and memory performance system as a classic with 040 or 060 can reach this good values / MHZ

And i am sure, when do tests with local files, then there is no such easy excuse possible, so maybe nobody do that.

[unusedunused]

How about if you'd provide the test kit with instructions how to use it? If you don't, everyone will do random thing x and you will get totally random results. I know I know, you're 99% sure everyone is doing it correctly...

The only way to get reliable results would be to run the tests on the same system, with offline content. Anything else is just pointless random guessing about the testing environment for any specific result. Drawing any kind of conclusions from such a random result set is just idiotic.

as i told, its no problem, if the MOS or OS4 developers think the test is wrong, they can post time values offline.this cost btw less time, as you spend to write text to me.

[unusedunused]

Sure. Except that each test would be different and thus the values could not be compared against each other.

How hard is it to understand this?

Because CSS layout is the main speed problem it doesnt matter if the text is diffrent a little longer or have other images.

try it out if you dont believe.

save the page today to harddrive and save it tomorrow to harddrive or on some other days

you notice speed differ not much.if OS4 Or OWB browser is maybe 70% faster or not(depend on page content) doesnt matter, because 68k SDL was more than 3.3* faster at 100 MHZ

[unusedunused]

You do understand that

• the actual content on the pages changes daily if not every minute
• if everyone is to run the test by themselves they might save the page in a different way

There is just no way this can work out. The test kit must be static or the whole exercise is just totally pointless.

I officially give up on you. I'll look into the ignore feature here on amiga.org. There, you're now ignored. Feel free to dwell in your ignorance.

Yes i undertand that, but its only important to get really exact values, if maybe the speed betweeen systems is only 20-80%  diffrent.

But we talk about factor of 3.3 and more that the SDL netsurf is faster

so a measure inaccuracy of 80-100 % doesnt matter.

another example. When a Formula 1 car must race between a series 100 ps Car both with good drivers, it doesnt matter if it rain or not, the formula 1 is so much faster, so it win always.

so the series 100ps car can drive on dry course and the Formula 1 car can drive on rainy course.

and many told that ixemul and SDL and 68k compilers are so slow, so the formala 1 is from most call as PPC System.
so when believe the words of the 68k bashers, then PPC must be the one that is 3* faster as 68k at 100 MHZ

You can also look on efika how fast it is.

[unusedunused]

Yes it is quite amusing and sad that you morphOS fans seem to feel the need to pick out flaws and issues with a product you clearly not interested in. And when Odyssey came out how many of you had a nice discussion about all the feature that Fab hard work has done for you
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=58734
3 posts, and notice how many OS4 fans jump on and bashed the project or tried to derail the thread?

this post from jorkany

""""
I just got the FireFox 6.0 update for OS X.

Hows that FF 4.0 rewrite of Timberwolf coming along?
""""

is only a troll post, if he know not that the friedens have tell they want only release firefox 4 as far i remember, and not more.but you cant asume that all read this statement.

I have the feeling the OS4 side is oversensible

instead of write your long post, a short link to that message tell the user that the friedens need not do more than 3.6.

Maybe some day(maybe when X1000 is release) they tell oh we can not do 4.x we do only 3.6 .the bounty rules say thats ok, because it is not modified to current situation

""""
http://www.amigabounty.net/?function=viewproject&projectid=44

This bounty shall not cover anything beyond the released version, ie. Version 3.6 or later versions of Firefox.
"""""

but with very small programming knowledge can see that its a bad port, when a working Port can not easy update to newest Version.
normaly once a OS is support, newer version of such a platform portable Software as firefox can compile in newest version by a user with little programming and compiler knowledge.
maybe its possible there happen some small problems, here can a expert developer help, but normaly this are only small things, that can fix in some days.

I think a browser for AOS is useless to attract new users, when he can not easy update to newest Core Version, and coders that do the Port miss talent to do such a port.

[unusedunused]

Eh? From what I see at the amigabounty website describing the Timberwolf project:

The version to be ported is the most recent 4.0 version including the latest stability fixes. At the time of writing this, the most recent 4.0 version is 4.0.1. Any subsequent stability fix will be applied.

Later versions of Firefox (4.1 and beyond) are not covered by the bounty.

You text stand above. but below under initial release stand this.so seem this text is forget to modify


"""
http://www.amigabounty.net/?function=viewproject&projectid=44
......
Initial Release

As outlined above, the initial release aims at being up-to-date with the current stable branch of Mozilla/Firefox. That is, if for example the current stable branch of Firefox is 3.5.1, then Timberwolf shall be based on 3.5.1. After this version, the author(s) of Timberwolf shall use best effort to
continue to update to interim stable released of Firefox, i.e. 3.5.2, 3.5.3 etc. This bounty shall not cover anything beyond the released version, ie. Version 3.6 or later versions of Firefox.


""

[unusedunused]

Eh? From what I see at the amigabounty website describing the Timberwolf project:

The version to be ported is the most recent 4.0 version including the latest stability fixes. At the time of writing this, the most recent 4.0 version is 4.0.1. Any subsequent stability fix will be applied.

Later versions of Firefox (4.1 and beyond) are not covered by the bounty.

Your text stand above, now i see it. but below under "initial release" stand this.so seem this text is forget to modify, because tell the oppusite


"""
http://www.amigabounty.net/?function=viewproject&projectid=44
......
Initial Release

As outlined above, the initial release aims at being up-to-date with the current stable branch of Mozilla/Firefox. That is, if for example the current stable branch of Firefox is 3.5.1, then Timberwolf shall be based on 3.5.1. After this version, the author(s) of Timberwolf shall use best effort to
continue to update to interim stable released of Firefox, i.e. 3.5.2, 3.5.3 etc. This bounty shall not cover anything beyond the released version, ie. Version 3.6 or later versions of Firefox.


""

[unusedunused]

BUT it is true that amiga.org is most hostile forum against OS4 and that is mostly because some MOS users who like to hijact every single OS4 thread.

I get the experience that this Forum is the only in the amiga world that stay neutral, in other Forums there are OS4 Fans in Moderation that do not like any other AOS, they allow to write bashes against other AOS.some OS4 user dont accept other AOS, they write simular as, all should buy OS4 and other AOS are bad and not Amigan.

but if somebody say something correct, wy he not want buy the glory OS4 or believe what they tell, and this let the OS4 not look in best shine, then the post is delete.

So the forum moderations of other Forums help to let OS4 shine better as it really is.

[unusedunused]

no it doesnt, it is an example. i understand english is not your first langauge, but you are reading something that is not there.

ok, now i understand, but i think to make it more clear, the best is when below the initial release text is too change.

because the initial release was in my understanding given with the the alpha version which is release some months

[unusedunused]

But since this is a hobby project, who really cares? Just sayin, don't expect an actual release any time soon (Timberwolf first appeared back in 2009) and if there is a "release" expect in-house beta quality.

it cares alot.before OWB OS4 was begin, firefox for OS4 was develop in silence.nobody here messages about firefox state of OS4.

I read many posts on other sites, simular that "OS4 is the best and should buy", because only here is firefox, after the loud announce of timberwolf for OS4.

The friedens can continue develop in silence, and when they are near ready with their firefox, they can announce that and short after release.

but when the timberwolf is not promote so loud since MOS OWB is better as OS4, then no user can tell that OS4 is the best that it have firefox.
maybe users leave OS4, because they see no advantage for the much money.and the timberwolf announce keep them here.....

My feeling is the Hyperion guys can better play poker with bluffing than coding ;-)