Netsurf for 68k amigas, css capable web brower

[Fab]

I can't believe it. This netsurf also uses ixemul?

Artur: just don't use ixemul, please (add -noixemul at compilation and link). You're just asking for deep trouble, otherwise.

Bernd: I really question your development/porting advices.

[Fab]

now i start OWB several times and it take more than 90 sec without JIT.when i activate JIT, page is load always in 1,5 sec in netsurf

[...]

you see from OS4/MOS side no value is come or what happen on reuters page, so i guess there is same problem.

Despite all the arguments previously given regarding link speed/latency and whatever that can greatly ruin a "benchmark", here's a value for you:
OWB 1.3 MorphOS loads reuters in 10s on my peg2.
FireFox 3.something loads it in 15s on a pc/xp in the same network (and that pc is quite faster than my peg2).

So you see, it's easy to throw random values.

[Fab]

how do you measure that ?

My measure is done when the page is fully loaded (images included). If I take your argument that not everything has to be loaded, then I can already scroll to bottom at 7s or so.

Anyway, silly test if it's not done locally, like Piru told.

[Fab]

after what time you can move the slider or scroll with cursor keys and you need not wait ?

First, the rendering is not OWB specific. It renders the same way on any webkit-based browser.

And then, you can scroll after about 2s (the page is already partially loaded at that point). At 5s the whole document height is computed and you can scroll to bottom as well.

But again, silly test.

And by the way, to compare it on a fair basis, if javascript is disabled in OWB, then the whole document loads in 4s (images included), and you can already scroll to bottom after 1s.

So, happy now?

[Fab]

Here, with OWB 1.3 for MorphOS, it takes about 20s to load fully, and you can already scroll to bottom after 4s (note that on MorphOS, OWB network manager is threaded).

FireFox gave a similar result, loading in about 20s too, and allowing to scroll after about 4-5s.

But i wonder once again why i replied about that kind of benchmark that depends on way too many factors.

[Fab]

You are free to run a cache proxy and bring more accurate results.
But because most are too lazy to do this extra work, then this values are better than nothing to see if amiga browsers work good in compare to firefox, to see if it is usefull to have firefox too

also you can post values when you do a site back to show how long time need to show full page but in cache.

its also intresting to see how the speed is when MOS OWB use no threads.if it is possible to disable by define.

as far i know OS4 OWB use no threads and 68k too not.

Maybe it help users to choose the better OWB.

I think using thread is important, to get same speed as firefox
but if not really know if it have noticable speedup with threa

Actually, the way it's currently done, threads don't speed up the process, since all the connections run in a single (and separated from main context) thread.

But like i already said previously, all CURL handles are handled asynchronously (non blocking sockets, process stuff when data arrives,...). The problem is some parts of the process are still a bit long (data reception) or very long (DNS resolution which is a major blocking call, unless c-ares or an additional lookup thread is spawned).

So, even tho CURL is mostly asynchronous, it still makes sense to run it in a dedicated thread to avoid blocking the gui during DNS lookups or long data reception phase.