@samo79

Dunno what you mean there, i open it and open one thread on in both browsers, and speed in general the same.

I mostly talk about some direct links, without "try open few tabs here", just links on which we can press in both browsers, and by mouse wheel scroll the pages, and see the differences.

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

@kas1e

Yep i point this because that portal is generally a bit slow on Reaction OWB when 2 or more tab are loading at the same time in background

_________________
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

Checked Facebook for now : Just main first page, in reaction owb VERY SLOW. In mui-owb fast and light. Difference are very visibly and its like compare sky and ground (will make a video later)

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

@kas1e

That does sound promising, will look forward to seeing the videos.

Cheers.

_________________
If your nose runs and your feet smell, you're upside down.

@kas1e
Thanks for the update

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

Wow ! Looking forward to the first release

_________________
Theres a time to live and a time to die
When its time to meet the maker
Theres a time to live but isnt it strange
That as soon as you're born you're dying

@kas1e

ok, so mos owb is well faster that the joergs one. as speed was one of the main arguments not to port to 68k in the past i hope it will really motivate someone who can maintain such task.

@wawa
As Fab say, MUI-OWB is only faster than Reaction-OWB in certain specialised cases, such as the Facebook case that Fab mentioned & Kas1e tried. Maybe you never use web sites which have those cases, or maybe you use ones which have that case a lot...

Last edited by ChrisH on 17-Feb-2011 at 09:06 PM.

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

@ChrisH

Well, no. It's also a bit faster for other reasons too.
But these specific cases also happens more frequently than you think, anyway. For instance, when replying in a forum, depending on layout and the rectangle enclosing all the animated parts, webkit/cairo can easily crawl if the refresh method isn't adequate.

@Fab



BTW, is there any news about 1.12 release for MorphOS ?

And if yes, what's new on that ? ;.)

_________________
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

WebKit guys apparently fixed the javascript bug that was annoying me, a couple days ago. On the other hand, they introduced/caused a new one elsewhere (but i should be able to fix that one, at least).

Regarding new features for 1.12, i think i've already written it somewhere, but it's about url settings (like ibrowse), private browsing, smarter clipboard handling in some cases, and small things here and there.

Last edited by Fab on 18-Feb-2011 at 01:21 AM.

@Fab

Quote:

WebKit guys apparently fixed the javascript bug that was annoying me, a couple days ago. On the other hand, they introduced/caused a new one elsewhere (but i should be able to fix that one, at least).

Good news, i'm very curious to try it deeply

Quote:

Regarding new features for 1.12, i think i've already written it somewhere, but it's about url settings (like ibrowse), private browsing, smarter clipboard handling in some cases, and small things here and there.

I'm not saying for 1.12 but for the future release can you add the possibility (maybe optional) to move the URL search above to be able to having it on the same row of the buttons ?

Same things about the main throbbler, all might be fitted in a "single row" of course except the fast links

The actual UI implemention i think it is a bit "eating space" choice, also would be cool if user can be able to decide the "addtab" button position, Firefox or OWB-Reaction have it placed at the right and i feel it's better than having it on left because when you open a new tab, this one will be open at the right, (from left to right and not vicerversa)

Aniway, just some suggestion for an already great product

_________________
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

@Fab

Private browsing would be a very cool feature! Its becoming quite a nice full featured and compatible browser. Are you going to have a new name for 1.12 release? :)

Also, would it be possible a built in anonymizer? Maybe some sort of plug in.

@Fab Quote:

But these specific cases also happens more frequently than you think, anyway.

I didn't mean to imply ANY frequency of occurance, which is why I said "Maybe you never use web sites which have those cases, or maybe you use ones which have that case a lot".

The point I was trying to make is that the speed-ups are VERY dependant on the web site.

@realize Quote:

Its becoming quite a nice full featured and compatible browser.

Yes. The only problem is it needs some skilled & motivated Amiga programmer (currently mostly Fab?) to keep adding & updating it's features (not to mention fixing security holes), or it will get old again soon (since the Web move FAST).

That's the main reason why I think a port of Firefox (or some other modern web browser, like Chrome, Safari, etc) might be better in the long run: Because once the initial (big) porting work has been done, it should hopefully take a lot less effort to keep the Amiga version up-to-date.

(I know Fab is using the WebKit engine, but there is still a lot of "peripheral" stuff that has to be added on-top of that. A fully-featured modern web browser has a very complex GUI, plus a lot of associated "book-keeping" to make all of that work.)


That is not intended as any disservice to Fab. Sounds like he is doing a great job. The only problem is that there is only one Fab, and no doubt his services could find (a lot more) use elsewhere, if he wasn't spending so much time on OWB. OWB might become something that (more or less) *permanently* eats a lot of his time, albiet with some shorter periods where he doesn't need to work on OWB. At least that is my fear :(

Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 09:58 AM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 09:55 AM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 09:53 AM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 09:49 AM.

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

@ChrisH

You are right, but because we all know how thinks happens in amiga deals , better to have just that what fab already done, and that will be used for 5 or more years already. The same as was with ibrowse, which someone still use.

Of course cool port of firefox can be interesting, but we again know the stuff, and we all understand that it can be not done in next 1-2 year easyly (when brothers will almost done with it, then ff 5.0 will out, and they will start to work on 5.0). And we always will have nothing.

For now the only normal way which we have for all amiga-kind oses : fab's owb. The best available solution for now (and imho for long will be still).

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

@ChrisH

Keeping the WebKit engine up-to-date would be a smaller job than keeping a whole browser up-to-date, surely?

Chromium has a native UI that needs to be developed on each platform for instance. As for Firefox, it changes drastically with every major version, hence the delay of Timberwolf or the stalling of BeZilla at Firefox 2. I don't think that's a guarantee of anything except loads more work.

There's nothing more important than having a truly native browser that show-cases the OS's features. I'd be more worried that core OS4 devs are wasting their time on a non-native browser port, than what Fab does.

Chris

Last edited by clebin on 18-Feb-2011 at 10:38 AM.

@clebin
I was only airing my fears. I don't wish to enter into a long argument about it, particularly since it could (somehow) get misinterpreted as an attack on Fab or even MOS (even though it is not). And well, my beliefs aren't important anyway, and don't seem likely to make any difference since MUI-OWB/etc is already here.

So I don't intend to reply further, beyond the following clarifications:

Quote:

Wouldn't keeping the WebKit engine up-to-date be a smaller job than keeping the whole browser up-to-date?

Absolutely. That's why OWB is more likely to stay in development than IBrowse or AWeb or (heh) Voyager. This makes MUI-OWB very important step for Amiga platforms.

Quote:

As for Firefox, it changes drastically with every major version, hence the delay of Timberwolf or the stalling of BeZilla at Firefox 2. I don't think that's a guarantee of anything except loads more work.

That is certainly a concern, but Firefox 4 is very new (not even officially finished yet), and I guess unlikely to have any major changes until Firefox 5, which must surely be several years away (Firefox 3 is 3 years old!). And even after Firefox 5, Firefox 4 is likely to be kept up-to-date with security patches for some time.

I think I'd be very happy if we only needed minor porting work for interm releases of Firefox 4 for 3 years... (And if Mozilla speed-up their release cycle for Firefox, then it likely means less changes in each major new version, thus less porting work.)

Quote:

There's nothing more important than having a truly native browser that show-cases the OS's features. I'd be more worried that core OS4 devs are wasting their time on a non-native browser port, than what Fab does.

Not sure why it has to be a "truly native browser" to show-case the OS's features. Lots of other native software, or even advanced ports, could potentially do that.

Timberwolf is a personal project by Thomas Frieden, and is not done in the time that Hyperion pay him to work on OS4.

Last edited by ChrisH on 21-Feb-2011 at 05:52 PM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 11:04 AM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 11:00 AM.
Last edited by ChrisH on 18-Feb-2011 at 10:59 AM.

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

@Fab

Thanks for turning OWB more and more into the new ibrowse!

I mostly use ibrowse because it has so many nice features, and I fallback to OWB (OS4) when there's really no other way to access some information from a website with ibrowse, e.g. not even by editing the html in the source window.
Yet as time goes by more and more useful sites become less and less accessible with ibrowse, so the more useful features of ibrowse make their way into OWB, the less painful the final transition to OWB will be...
(IOW keep adding ibrowse's features to OWB! )

@kas1e

Thanks to you for taking the time to bring Fab's OWB to OS4!

I guess I could reward you by sending you a custom version of DigiClock implementing all the features on your wish list

_________________
AlexC's free OS4 software collection

AmigaOne XE/X1000/X5000/UAE-PPC OS4 laptop/X-10 Home Automation

@AlexC

Last version of digiclock already fine enough :)

Anyway, all the hard work now do Deniil. I for now mostly just follow the progress, annoy him (and others), fixing some very easy bugs, testing and so on.

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

@Fab & kas1e

I think a rappresentation for the most visited sites as thumbs(like on opera) can be a nice thing to add in (near?)future...

Also(later) a bookmarks like the Safari one(if possible with OS4/MOS APIs)...

Not so much imoprtant things(especially the second one)...only future features requests if possible :)

GOOD WORK!

_________________
Simone"Tuxedo"Monsignori, Perugia, ITALY.