this article, originally written 14/09/11, was updated 25/07/12 to reflect changes in browser options since the initial authoring and updated benchmark numbers....

Folks,

When I first starting considering trying an Amiga system, the one question I had was: is there a good web browser? More than any other application the web browser has become the primary tool for most users of personal computing devices today, especially in light of increasingly useful web-based applications. For the Amiga platform to succeed a good browsing experience is vital. Unfortunately for OS4 users the current crop of web browsers available is a bit of a mixed bag. So I thought I'd sum up my experiences on my SAM and, as of July 2012, Pegasos II machines so far; perhaps it might be interesting to users new to or considering a next-generation Amiga running AmigaOS 4.1u4. The post is more akin to an article, but I wanted to get your feedback:

The Past

IBrowse (v2.4)

Many moons ago the only real browsing experience possible on AmigaOS was the venerable IBrowse. Commercially developed, having more features than a pomegranate has pips, its inclusion with AmigaOS 4.0 was so important that Hyperion commissioned a port of MUI to be included with the basic system installation. And for good reason: although IBrowse is no longer actively developed and is still a 68K application, IBrowse remains an absolute wonder.

First, the browser experience: terrific. I have yet to see a more feature-complete browser for nearly any platform. The download manager, bookmark manager, preferences manager, customization possibilities, and scripting support is second-to-none. It looks and feels like a true Amiga application, not a port from another platform, and has all of the nice touches you would expect in a commercial application.

Second, it's fast. Really fast. To the point that it matches the rendering speed of Firefox on much, much faster commodity PC hardware. Unfortunately there is a reason for that speed: it's not actually rendering very much. HTML5 support? No. CSS2 support? No. Modern JavaScript engine? No. In fact it struggles with even the most basic sites using reasonably recent standards, such as Google. This is a terrible shame, because with a more up-to-date HTML parser, IBrowse could be the perfect browser.

As such I only tend to use it for downloading files -- because of its excellent Download Manager -- and browsing Amiga community websites due to its rendering speed.

The Present

OWB (v3.32)

Based on the open-source WebKit engine, Joerg Strohmeyers's OWB was until very recently probably the first point of departure for the Interwebs on OS4. Stable, reasonably speedy and standards-compliant, the OS4 version of OWB seems the ideal replacement for the venerable IBrowse -- but that's only part of the story. You'll be able to work with just about any site out there excepting those using Adobe Flash and HTML5 video and audio. With excellent HTML, CSS, and JavaScript support, Facebook, Google Apps, among others, render perfectly well and akin to what you would find on a Windows, Mac OS, or Linux-based PC. You have the comforts of tabbed browsing, context pop-up menus, and a minimal, but beautiful, Reaction-based GUI. I'd been using OWB as my main browser since firing up my SAM for the first time and it never let me down as a web viewer. As a complete browsing experience, though, it leaves much to be desired.

For starters there is no download manager, no preferences manager (you'll be editing what few options there are as tooltypes in the OWB icon information pane), no printing support, no password management, no history display, no way to manage cookies or indeed any privacy settings, in short, very little in the way of functionality people have become accustomed to since the earliest days of Netscape Navigator and Internet Explorer. Even the most basic of bookmarks management is in reality a separate utility.

There is a very good reason this browser isn't terribly feature-complete: it wasn't meant to be. Joerg was kind enough to create the OS4 version as OWB primarily as a stopgap measure with the planned coming of Timberwolf, the OS4 port of Firefox. Timberwolf is finally here in its first incarnation, but unless you're running on an AmigaOne X1000, you'll probably find performance to be a tad lacking (more on that later). Nonetheless OWB become the default browser on OS4. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, since as said before it works beautifully. It's just feature poor as an application. As a viewer into the Interwebs it succeeds brilliantly. It also happens to be one of the most responsive -- from a user-interface perspective, not HTML rendering -- browsers available.

Of course not everyone felt that way, and Joerg has been pummelled with feature requests and other RFEs from users throughout the Amiga community, and sometimes couched in not so-appreciative language. Eventually Joerg just had enough, and said so. His OWB port is no longer under development, at least officially. This is sad on many levels, and so, to close, I would simply say that the existance of OWB for OS4 was a primary requirement for my entrance into the Amiga community; had it not existed, I never would have bothered purchasing a SAM. 'Mad props' to Joerg for his work on this in the past. The last available version, v3.32, is still available on Joerg's web site.

MUIOWB (v1.9)

Although I would rather have had Joerg decide to renew OWB development again, thanks to the work of several community members, the MorphOS version of OWB was ported over to OS4 some months ago. Just like Joerg's version it retains terrific standards compliance, but it also brings a much more complete browser experience, including all of the 'missing' features of our current OWB listed earlier. Features like a useful download manager, network manager (for managing specific connections associated with elements in a web page), cookie manager, excellent and extensive preferences, the ability to 'weed out' graphics from advertising providers, and very nice and well-integrated history management.

It's also a speedy devil. Although my SAM certainly doesn't have the power of anything close to modern PCs -- or even PCs from nearly a decade ago -- MUIOWB actually makes web browsing enjoyable again on my Amiga rather than feeling like a chore. Javascript support so far has proven excellent, and I haven't detected any specific rendering issues. Since moving mostly over to my Pegasos, the browsing experience is even better. Without a doubt, this is probably the most complete web browser AmigaOS users have ever had. And it is my, and many others', browser of choice on AmigaOS systems.

In a way I still don't like it as much as Joerg's on some levels. First off the default MUI-based interface elements just look unpleasant. Of course that's a subjective call; others may differ on that point. And as it is only in its first release on our platform, stability is an issue. I've gotten a couple of freezes at random, something which I've never experienced with the 'older' OWB; and there are odd little interface issues as well, like replacing fonts in certain interface elements with a tiny size at random. Scrolling speed on most pages is very sluggish as well, certainly more so that any other browser I've used on my SAM to date, although it's better on the Pegasos as one might imagine; and, finally, the font rendering looks poor in comparison with what I see on other applications, including OWB v3.32 and Netsurf v2.9. This hasn't changed since its initial release, but the porting team have been granted access to the latest source build from the MorphOS version, so hopefully things will get cleaned up soon.

That said, it really is the best thing out there at the moment for almost every user, and my criticisms above really are nit-picking. It also represents a very nice cross-platform effort, something which is rare given the animosity between certain elements of the AmigaOS and MorphOS user base. Go ahead and download it from os4depot and give it a whirl. You'll end up using it as your default, no doubt.

Netsurf (v2.9)

Ah, now at first this seems more like the browser I've been looking for. Like OWB for OS4, Netsurf includes a Reaction-based GUI, so it looks and feels like a native OS4 application. It has a status window for downloading files, a preferences manager, a bookmarks manager (called a hotlist manager), and support for the AREXX scripting langauge. It even has rudimentary printing support -- which doesn't sound all that important until you want to print out a boarding pass for an airline flight and find printing support is missing. Netsurf also doesn't suffer from being a one-off or a product from a long-gone company: it actually comes from a multi-platform, open-source project in which the Amiga platform is an equal among many, not just an afterthought. And it is supported by Unsatisfactory Software, authors of well-known and popular AmigaOS software. When it iconifies onto the Workbench, the icon is even a preview of the page you had been viewing, which is a very nice touch.

I like Netsurf; I like it a lot. I like that fact that it can be themed, I like the fact that is open-source software and the developers are easily accessible and supportive of their users, and I like the speed. It feels faster than MUIOWB on many sites, but like IBrowse, there is a reason for that perceived speed: lack of function. In this case no support for JavaScript. At all. In the late 1990s that didn't matter too much. It probably didn't even matter that much a few years ago. But today, if the web is considered a modern application platform as much as an amorphous collection of static pages, JavaScript is the engine that allows for that. So no Google Docs, no Facebook (well, that could actually be considered a plus), and half-functionality on most modern sites out there.

A modern JavaScript interpreter is planned, but it will probably be a very long time before it sees the light of day. That being said the CSS support is excellent, as is modern HTML support -- so chances are if you're trying to view a static page it will render just fine. So does that mean that Netsurf should be your main browser, using OWB or MUIOWB when JavaScript is needed?

Yes. Although it had suffered from stability issues on my SAM with past versions past, now with v2.9, it's been rock-solid on both my SAM and my Pegasos boxes. I'd like to see a more complete Download Manager integrated at some point, and it still needs a better progress indicator while downloading and rendering page elements. Scrolling performance also dropped off starting with v2.9 -- but it's still darn speedy. Chris is a tremendous guy steadily working on future versions and this is a product which will no doubt improve with time. If you haven't used Netsurf in a while, try it. You'll be surprised just how good it is.

The Future

Timberwolf

For a great many years, starting with the AmiZilla project and ending with the Timberwolf bounty, Amigans have yearned for a version of a mainstream browser on their NG hardware. Ported by the incredibly talented Frieden brothers as a private project, Timberwolf is a native version of Mozilla Firefox for AmigaOS. It is by far the most feature complete browsing experience available on any NG platform -- except when it comes to Amiga-specific features. There are no Amiga menus; there are no Amiga interface gadgets or scrollbars; there is no printing support. This is a port and it really feels like one. Moreover the release candidates (the latest as of this writing) have been painfully slow: slow to launch, slow to render, sluggish in use. Now it should be pointed out that the Friedens know this, and, more to the point, have made it as clear as humanly possible that the first version's goals are stability and feature-completeness. Performance and Amiga-specific functionality comes later. So everyone should just hold their belly-aching for the moment.

I suppose I can't fault them: it is the right path to go, and after such a long delay, it's nice to finally have something we can run on our systems at long last. And on the AmigaOne X1000 it is very performant indeed. I don't know why the performance differential is bigger on other machines, but on the A1X1K, it really shines. Firefox uses technologies which are also the basis for a host of other applications sponsored by the Mozilla Organization, so having it on AmigaOS helps to future-proof the platform somewhat as well as demonstrate that the modern Amiga platform can take nearly anything you throw at it.

I really think this is the browser of the future, the one we'll be using in 2013 and years to come. But for the moment, unless you have the latest Amiga NG machine, I can't really recommend it unless there are Firefox plugins that are absolute requirements for you. For me, I'll be anxiously waiting the next major release. It should be terrific.

So what to use?

Ideally we'd have a performant, hardware-accelerated Timberwolf now, resplendent in a native Amiga GUI. But for now, we wait. In the interim there are three 'modern' browsers available. Leaving aside the issue of interface 'beauty' issues, MUIOWB is probably the most feature-complete option currently available. But what about performance? To answer this I tried a few web sites with our three current choices. All times are in seconds, they include everything from the moment the 'return' key is hit until every element is downloaded and renders, and all caches were cleared. The first set of numbers is from the original article, running on a SAM440ep-flex machine at 667MHz:

                MUIOWB  RAOWB*  Netsurf*
amigaworld.net  5.2     10.9   6.8
amiga.org       12.4    13.5   7.0
amigans.net     5.9     8.7    7.1
cnn.com         21.6    25.2   15.1
bbcnews.com     36.4    42.4   15.4
osnews.com      8.7     15.3   6.8
facebook.com    31.9    24.6   n/a

* these benchmarks were performed with previous versions 
of RAOWB (v3.31) and Netsurf (v2.7)

                MUIOWB  RAOWB  Netsurf  Timberwolf
amigaworld.net  3.6     3.6    4.6      9.8
amiga.org       7.8     8.0    6.5      9.8
amigans.net     5.5     7.6    3.4      5.2
cnn.com         13.4    25.1   6.7      14.4
bbcnews.com     13.7    21.6   9.1      19.8
osnews.com      3.5     19.6   4.0      8.9
facebook.com    19.7    30.1   n/a      41.6

Last edited by eliyahu on 22-Aug-2012 at 08:28 PM.
Last edited by eliyahu on 25-Jul-2012 at 07:01 PM.
Last edited by eliyahu on 14-Sep-2011 at 08:49 PM.
Last edited by eliyahu on 14-Sep-2011 at 08:36 PM.

_________________
"Physical reality is consistent with universal laws. When the laws do not operate, there is no reality. All of this is unreal."

@eliyahu

Great overview, I'm sure this will help many people.

A couple of minor points:
AWeb - wasn't mentioned, but probably should have been as it has an OS4 native version, and I believe is still in development (but since the project site was taken down I am unable to confirm that - Andy/broadblues is the person to speak to)
OWB - latest version is 3.32 not 3.31. I still haven't tried the upgrade as it was unstable under Update 2, but apparently fine under Update 3. It does support HTML5 video.
NetSurf - You'll be pleased to know iconify has been added (when running on WB screen only), and frames are now rendered by the core so are laid out properly and don't crash. Both are in v2.8 which will be released "in two more weeks"

A bit of an aside, I find the Twitter mobile site in any browser a far better option than the non-mobile site in either OWB flavour. MUI-OWB has serious problems with it, and RA-OWB loads the logon page so slowly I can make a cup of tea and come back and still have time to return to the kitchen to collect cake It's definitely worth checking out the mobile versions of sites if the proper ones don't work for any reason, as they tend to lack Javascript, CSS, Flash etc.

_________________
"Miracles we do at once, the impossible takes a little longer" - AJS on Hyperion
Avatar is Tabitha by Eric W Schwartz

@eliyahu
Thanks for this comparison.
My main problem with current browsers is the scrolling speed on my Sam system.
Ibrowse is the only browser that seems to have smooth scrolling for me and i still wonder why, as i doubt that has much to do with java since all suffers at that part even with pages that dosent rely on modern features like CSS2 and javascript.

@Chris_Y

RA OWB doesn't support HTML5 video. Only OWB MorphOS does (and Timberwolf, but only for old codecs and *very* slowly).

@Tomas

It's not really scrolling speed being a problem, but rendering speed. It has to do with the graphics system used by these browsers. OWB (be it RA or MUI) and TW use Cairo to render, and Cairo is really cpu-intensive (especially when there's no accelerated backend for it).

@eliyahu

Thanks for the speed comparison. I actually used OWB 3.32 until recently, because 3.31 crashed more.

It's difficult to start using Netsurf when most of the sites I frequent use Javascript in some important manner. Similar to why IBrowse doesn't get used anymore.

MUIOWB has worked well for me. I won't comment on the future.

_________________
: AmigaOneXE (unmod.) 750FX/512 MB +stuff & AmigaOS 4.(0|1)
: A1200/68060&96MB/SCSI/EM1200-Voodoo3 & OS 3.5
: A500/1MB
: Pegasos (ff) 512 MB & MorphOS
Praise seitan.

@Fab

My mistake, it must have been Timberwolf I had HTML5 video playing on.

_________________
"Miracles we do at once, the impossible takes a little longer" - AJS on Hyperion
Avatar is Tabitha by Eric W Schwartz

Voyager wasn't bad in its day either....

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@elyuahu

Adequate tests :) Some comment about muiowb:

Quote:

But I still don't like it as much as Joerg's on some levels. First off the default MUI-based interface elements just look unpleasant. Of course that's a subjective call; others may differ on that point.

No no, that is not so subjective, default aos4 mui theme indeed ugly. And there was reasson for : our old MUI not support more than 4 (!!) colors for gadgets and buttons. Only imagine that in 2011, GUI not support more thatn 4 colors in some areas :) That was reasson why Mason create "more or less" fine (for 4 colors) theme. Its better how it can be for 4colors, but of course, its even not 128 (when possible to do something pretty good looking with dithering).

Now, our mui support all those truecolor images, gradients and stuff, and so, now there is not technical reassons to have ugly mui-theme by default. Its already can be something as on morphos , just need someone who will do that new theme (like Mason or ImagoDesprira or some others).

Quote:

And as it is only in its first release on our platform, stability is an issue. I've gotten a couple of freezes at random, something which I've never experienced with the 'older' OWB

As i read here and here, some ppls have stability issues indeed, but others are not (and i am on my peg2 also not have stability issues). So, i think about :

1. Update3 bring some problems

2. If someone have stability issues with muiowb, there can be wort to try : install update2, and manually replace all mui files from update3 to installed OS (the only new mui files from update3 are need it to make muiowb works).

But for sure, there can be just some bugs in port and in mui itself , which need to catch and fix.

Quote:

and there are odd little interface issues as well, like replacing fonts in certain interface elements with a tiny size at random.

Not happens for me, but some ppls already report it, so, when reproducable test case will be found by users it will be fixed of course.

Quote:

Scrolling speed on most pages is very sluggish as well, certainly more so that any other browser I've used on my SAM to date

At this point i think we need to collect all the sites which slower in compare with RA-OWB, and then we can worry about and detect why it happens , because, in theory , MUIOWB should be always faster in compare with RA-OWB.

Quote:

and, finally, the font rendering looks poor in comparison with what I see on other applications, including OWB v3.31 and Netsurf v2.7. It looks and feels like a port.

The reassons for it, is that muiowb use FontConfig , because as i understand Fab do not want to worry with removing that deps , besides Fontconfig give you ability to configure your fonts as you wish.

Through, my port of FontConfig just broken , and maybe Fab will give me someday his version :) Also to be say i hate all that fonts crap, and do not know at all how its all works on OS4, so, that area to which i need to dig-in to fix all of this and make it good-looking.

As note, you can for now just use only fonts which come with AOS4 (those from fonts:_TrueType), and remove from font.conf fonts:_ttf or how they called where font-installer donwload webcore fonts. And so, when only AOS4 fonts will be indexed by fontconfig, fonts will looks sharp,crisp and cool. That all need to learn normally and fix :)

_________________
Join us to improve dopus5!
zerohero's mirror of os4/os3 crosscompiler suites

Cheap plug follows

Your subject title got my attention as I have been wondering for sometime what other people's favourite Browser currently is on the AmigaOS platform.

To this end (here comes the plug ;p) when signing up to the Jack App-Store there is a very-short series of definitive questions. The first question I have posed is: 'Which of these is your PRIMARY and favourite Web Browser?'

There are 7 such questions in total, favourite Browser, Email, IRC, FTP, Torrent, Video playback, Audio playback... the important things that matter to most users.

_________________

@Chris_Y

Quote:

AWeb - wasn't mentioned, but probably should have been as it has an OS4 native version, and I believe is still in development (but since the project site was taken down I am unable to confirm that - Andy/broadblues is the person to speak to) OWB - latest version is 3.32 not 3.31. I still haven't tried the upgrade as it was unstable under Update 2, but apparently fine under Update 3. It does support HTML5 video. NetSurf - You'll be pleased to know iconify has been added (when running on WB screen only), and frames are now rendered by the core so are laid out properly and don't crash. Both are in v2.8 which will be released "in two more weeks"

aweb was available in an OS4-native version? i'll try and find a copy and give it a go.

as for OWB, yeah, i know v3.32 is the latest version, but it seems to have problems on my SAM so i went back to the last revision some weeks ago. of course that update (and a few before that) weren't expected, so maybe joerg will consider the occasional improvement over time. i guess time will tell.

terrific news on the netsurf front: looking forward to the next revision!

@Fab

Quote:

It's not really scrolling speed being a problem, but rendering speed. It has to do with the graphics system used by these browsers. OWB (be it RA or MUI) and TW use Cairo to render, and Cairo is really cpu-intensive (especially when there's no accelerated backend for it).

doesn't the native OS4 cairo engine have hardware acceleration? does MUIOWB on OS4 bring over its own cairo port or does it use the system-supplied engine for graphics rendering purposes?

@kas1e

glad to hear the MUI drawbacks (with regards to color tables) have been eliminated with the latest updates! i'd love to see a theme that looks like reaction (tabs, buttons, etc.) for a more consistent look-and-feel across applications, but, hey, i'm just glad its possible and thore continues to work on our MUI port.

if i can find a common element to the random freezes, i'll open an issue. unfortunately to date i can't seem to pin down anything reproducible. i will say that when the freeze occurs, it effects input devices, so it could be related to some deadlock in the USB stack.

on the fonts side, i think this illustrates an area where better developer documentation could help. the SDK is very useful, but a ton of the documentation is 'just' autodocs. i'm not a developer on this platform, but i imagine it isn't easy cobbling together all of the various bits of documentation given the huge number of changes since the RKRMs were published and OS4.1u3.

in any case, many thanks to you, @Fab, @Chris_Y, et al, for all of your terrific work over the past years and months. it has really made a difference in my daily amiga use!

-- eliyahu

_________________
"Physical reality is consistent with universal laws. When the laws do not operate, there is no reality. All of this is unreal."

@eliyahu

Quote:

doesn't the native OS4 cairo engine have hardware acceleration? does MUIOWB on OS4 bring over its own cairo port or does it use the system-supplied engine for graphics rendering purposes?

While i not fab, i still can answer on it as well :)

For muiowb i compile plain Cairo library with Pixman. And i do it because version in SDK are old, buggy, and trying to use some kind of aos-related code, which was done bad, and make everything works wrong.

By the same reassons Joerg also create his own Cairo port , and by all the tests i almost sure that its the same plain port.

TW, in compare, use HW accelerated Cairo port (i can be wrong, but its all looks like this, those bugs in menus and so on point on just bugs in cairo port, which maybe HW acceleareted, and because of it bugs happens), which, have only Fridens, and which not-released and maybe still have bugs. Will HW accelerated cairo released at all with SDK (with next one, or with any other) - i do not know , but if it will, then there will be no problems for me just to compile OWB with using of HW accelerated Cairo library.

Last edited by kas1e on 14-Sep-2011 at 09:59 PM.

_________________
Join us to improve dopus5!
zerohero's mirror of os4/os3 crosscompiler suites

@eliyahu

Quote:

aweb was available in an OS4-native version? i'll try and find a copy and give it a go.

http://aminet.net/package/comm/www/aweb_os4

Not sure if that is the absolute latest version, I'll check in a minute.

edit Latest is 3.5.09 (at least, that's the one I have installed). I've found the original archive too - it seems to be an update rather than a full package. I'll upload it to Aminet in a mo (it should appear here if it doesn't get renamed)

Quote:

doesn't the native OS4 cairo engine have hardware acceleration?

Yes, it does. Timberwolf and NetSurf both use it.

Last edited by Chris_Y on 14-Sep-2011 at 10:32 PM.
Last edited by Chris_Y on 14-Sep-2011 at 10:15 PM.

_________________
"Miracles we do at once, the impossible takes a little longer" - AJS on Hyperion
Avatar is Tabitha by Eric W Schwartz

Excellent review !

@ChrisY

OWB 3.32 work fine on your Update 3 ?

Here it doesn't work decently, as on Update 2 i have the same orrible block during navigation, sometimes you need to wait 20 seconds just to close it !

No problem with the previews versions, so when i use Reaction OWB (not so mutch since MUI OWB and the latest NetSurf) i use the oldest 3.31

_________________
BACK FOR THE FUTURE

http://www.betatesting.it/backforthefuture

Sam440ep Flex 800 Mhz 1 GB Ram + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 6
AmigaOne XE G3 800 Mhz - 640 MB Ram - Radeon 9200 SE + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 6

@samo79

I've not tried it as I never upgraded after bad reports under Update 2. I had heard it worked under Update 3 but if you are saying it doesn't then I believe you - and will blame the libcurl threaded resolver. Hopefully Fab's threaded libcurl works correctly on OS4.

_________________
"Miracles we do at once, the impossible takes a little longer" - AJS on Hyperion
Avatar is Tabitha by Eric W Schwartz

@eliyahu

Quote:

eliyahu wrote: MUIOWB RAOWB Netsurf amigaworld.net 5.2 10.9 6.8 amiga.org 12.4 13.5 7.0 amigans.net 5.9 8.7 7.1 cnn.com 21.6 25.2 15.1 bbcnews.com 36.4 42.4 15.4 osnews.com 8.7 15.3 6.8 facebook.com 31.9 24.6 n/a

OWB 1.15 is much quicker here, which of course depends also on the line and hardware power. cnn.com takes about 5-6s, bbcnews.com about 7s. Line is a 16k line, cpu is 1.5 GHz G4.

While these tests are rather subjective, peacekeeper score 847 pts.
details:
Rendering 601
Social networking 737
Complex graphics 1033
Data 1060
DOM operations 1055
Text parsing 881

Pretty fast, but current browsers on x86 score 10k+.

_________________
My programs: via.bckrs.de
MorphOS user since V0.4 (2001)

There is a web site that measures the speed of a browser. It measures how fast your browser can load a page.

www.2wire.com requires java script

"Speed Meter
What does this test actually measure?

This connection tests how fast your computer can load
a Web page from the 2Wire Website. It does not measure
the speed of your ISP connection, but rather the speed
at which the page is received and appears in your browser.

Why do other "bandwidth" meters give different results?

Bandwidth does not always mean the same thing. Other
meters measure how fast your connection is able to find a
requested Website, or how fast you can send and receive
email.

How do I determine if my results are good or poor?

Your results should be consistent and should not change
dramatically. If you receive inconsistent results, such as
a high number then a low number, you may be experiencing a
problem with your connection.

Browser speed results:

IBrowse = 10 Mbps
mui-owb = 5.7 Mbps
owb 3.15 = 2.2 Mbps
owb 3.31 + 2.2 Mbps

I have to admit, IBrowse is losing its usfulness, but still rocks speed wise.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

I don't have any numbers for comparison in front of me, but from my experience, IB should be useful (aka "renders faster") when it comes to really-really simple webpages, due to its aged rendering engine.

Right now, I am experiencing stability issues with MUIOWB and sometimes I revert back to RAOWB. But to tell you the truth, when I first fired it up, I though that I was using IB in terms of features with MUIOWB! I am mean, the design (gui), the fast rendering speed, everything! IMHO MUIOWB is the next step of RAOWB and IB and when final bugs will be iron out, it will be the absolute king in AOS4.x browsers' arena.

Timberwolf is on extremely early stage of development to fit in, in any comparison. However, even when it will be completed, I can't possibly think anything how it will be more useful than MUIOWB. Add-ons is the only reason I can think of, but when installing a lot it slows down the browser, plus the fact that most OS4.x powered machines are slow (in terms of Mhz/Ghz) and FF isn't know for being a lightweight browser.

_________________

@Cool_amigaN
One killer reason for using Timberwolf would be automatic synchronisation of bookmarks with Firefox on your Windows PC. In theory anyway (dunno how well it will really work).

And even if you don't use synchronisation, you can still copy your bookmarks across (which can be huge, due to how easy FF makes bookmarking). You could even copy your entire Firefox (4) profile to Timberwolf, so having an exact duplicate of your bookmarks, toolbars, add-ons, etc.

Last edited by ChrisH on 15-Sep-2011 at 11:25 AM.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@eliyahu

Excellent article and writing, thank you! Should be a must-read for anyone interested in jumping back to the Amiga.

@ChrisH

Yes, perhaps you are right and may work that way but you should be using already FF on Win as main browser. Personally, I really-really fear that it may be by far the slowest and more bloatware browser, especially when it comes to OS4.x platform, that boasts 8/10 systems into sub-Ghz category. With MUIOWB maturing, imho, it would be better spending these limited resources of skilled devs in other productivity software.

_________________