I was typing away in Odyssey on the forums when suddenly it threw back to the last page. I must have accidently pressed Amiga B. I pressed forward to get back into it only to find Odyssey had deleted all my text!

I find it rather annoying that Odyssey, which should be streets ahead of IBrowse, is actually older fashioned than IBrowse regarding these standard features. This isn't the first Odyssey has been trumped by IBrowse, which has a larger quoting buffer.

What's also bad is Odyssey didn't even ask if I wanted to delete all the text. Generally it is a prerequisite to ask the user if they want to delete it before deleting it. No, here Odyssey just rudely deletes it without asking.

Are there any settings than can be changed or plug ins that will save the text before Odyssey rudely deletes it?

@Hypex

I feel your pain. I am long winded and edit what I am typing.

I know this is not the answer you want but it is how I cope:

Have open an editor "ready to be typed into". If my post exceeds some threshold that occurs me as I type, I paint the text, copy it to the OS copy/paste buffer, and paste it in the editor, then return to my post.

There are variations, but that's what I do.

_________________
..effects of civilization upon...nature, the growing gap between what education was supposed to accomplish and what it consisted of, the national debt and...high taxes, the problem of the excess cost of medical care -- Philip Wylie, 1951

@Hypex

Yeah, agree this thing is a bit annoying, but it's not possible at the moment as the feature will not come from the sky, but eventually need to be implemented ...
However no one is currently working on Odyssey (except if i'm not mistake Bigfoot with his JIT attempts)

_________________
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

@Hypex

Whether the text n form is preserved, on any browser, is likely to do with whether the page was reloaded from cache or refecthed from the net.

OWB just preserved this text in an experiment.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@broadblues

but Odyssey not this, which is interesting as they are both webkit.[quote]

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@broadblues

Nor does chrome save the text in this context.

When it comes down to it saving the text in forms is bad idea no matter the occasional convenience as it's one hell of a security hole!

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@All

Thanks guys.

I've also done the editor trick before. Mostly with a PM as they can't be saved. And anything that was long and couldn't be completed so need to save the work else where.

@broadblues

Generally I find that a back or forward does read from cache. At least that is what used to happen. With a reload I would expect it to clear the text.

I tested OWB and it does indeed work as expected. Might need to use it more often.

Comparing OWB and Odyssey I did find the keyboard mappings are changed. Amiga B on OWB brings up bookmarks. Where as on Odyssey this is mapped to Amiga M. An accidental Amiga B slip in OWB will only load up the bookmarks so easy to recover from that.

I've also used Firefox on Linux x64 but have a plugin to save text as I type. That has saved me many a time. As I use it on a laptop with only 4GB RAM which is not enough for modern web browsing with Firefox as it can barely last half an hour without bringing the system down. Virtual memory is false llusion as that doesn't save it. Somehow, though the engines are old, we can still browse the internet on OS4 under 2GB RAM.

I'm surprised broadblues did not mention the editor button in AWeb. Clicking the button opens a selectable editor which can be used to type the text. Saving in the editor updates the form while leaving a copy in the editor. Some editors like CED support crash recovery of the text for extra protection. AWeb may have been the most configurable Amiga browser ever. It is too bad the web engine is out of date.

Quote:

Hypex wrote: I've also used Firefox on Linux x64 but have a plugin to save text as I type. That has saved me many a time. As I use it on a laptop with only 4GB RAM which is not enough for modern web browsing with Firefox as it can barely last half an hour without bringing the system down. Virtual memory is false llusion as that doesn't save it. Somehow, though the engines are old, we can still browse the internet on OS4 under 2GB RAM.

It is common for 64 bit x86_64 programs to use 15%-30% more memory than 32 bit x86 programs. A Firefox developer estimated the 64 bit version of Firefox used roughly 25% more memory than the 32 bit version. You may be better off with the 32 bit version of Firefox on your laptop if it is low enough spec as it can be snappier too (with only 8 GP CPU registers, stack args and reduced SIMD features but better code density and 32 bit pointers). The 64 bit version is usually faster for high end systems with the grunt to push the bloat. Firefox often aborts and exits when it runs out of address space as well as memory which may be due to fragmentation. Running out of memory is more of a problem with the 64 bit version and running out of address space with the 32 bit version.

AmigaOS 4 only has 32 bit support which saves memory. A 64 bit PPC AmigaOS would also use significantly more memory but it would be lower performance more often lacking the ISA and ABI performance gains of x86 to x86_64.

@Hypex

Quote:

I've also used Firefox on Linux x64 but have a plugin to save text as I type. That has saved me many a time. As I use it on a laptop with only 4GB RAM which is not enough for modern web browsing with Firefox as it can barely last half an hour without bringing the system down.

I'm able to browse just fine on my main PC which only has about 3.1 GB RAM (the maximum that this motherboard can handle as some of the memory space gets stolen by the BIOS). This is with Google Chrome on Ubuntu x86_64.

@matthey

Quote:

Clicking the button opens a selectable editor which can be used to type the text. Saving in the editor updates the form while leaving a copy in the editor.

That's what I used to do with IBrowse sometimes.

Quote:

You may be better off with the 32 bit version of Firefox on your laptop if it is low enough spec as it can be snappier too (with only 8 GP CPU registers, stack args and reduced SIMD features but better code density and 32 bit pointers).

It would be low spec as it's ten years old now, just slightly better than my X1000. Core2 Duo @1.8Ghz and 4GB RAM. I'll need to find out how to replace a 64 bit application with a 32 bit version in Linux.

Quote:

The 64 bit version is usually faster for high end systems with the grunt to push the bloat. Firefox often aborts and exits when it runs out of address space as well as memory which may be due to fragmentation.

It has aborted before which I prefer but it is rare. Right now, updating FireFox or the kernel made no difference to the multtasking, and it can take the machine down in seconds. There is a sudden thrashing on the HDD while Firefox instanly freezes and seconds later the system as well.

If I can't kill it in three steps I need to force power down. Can't shut down. I gave up on the REISUB rescue.

Levels of brutality:
3: Ctrl-Q ASAP. Will quit if I reach in time within 15 seconds.
2: Ctrl-Alt-Backspace. Will kill X server if I reach in time within 30 seconds.
1: Open console and hope it works. Login. Locate PID and send kill command. Will usually work if login doesn't take over 60 seconds.

Sometimes I can Ctrl-Alt-Del and it wil reset. But that rarely works. Most of the time it happens so fast I am forced to just shut off the power. It can come without warning. I can close the lid when it was fine, leave it over night, then open it to find Firefox had trashed the system before I could even log back in.

Last edited by Hypex on 13-Feb-2019 at 01:45 PM.

@salass00

Quote:

I'm able to browse just fine on my main PC which only has about 3.1 GB RAM (the maximum that this motherboard can handle as some of the memory space gets stolen by the BIOS). This is with Google Chrome on Ubuntu x86_64.

I've tried Chrome as well. It might be better. I tried to download a large mega file in Firefox three times and it just choked every time. In Chrome it worked once.

Quote:

Hypex wrote: It would be low spec as it's ten years old now, just slightly better than my X1000. Core2 Duo @1.8Ghz and 4GB RAM. I'll need to find out how to replace a 64 bit application with a 32 bit version in Linux.

I wouldn't call the Core 2 Duo "low spec". Maybe it would be mid performance in the x86_64 world today but it likely has better single core performance than *any* PPC or ARM CPU. The predecessor Core Duo was close to the performance of the PPC G5.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1936/6

The early Core 2 Duo for laptops was roughly 10% better performance than the Core Duo.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/2056/4

I would hope the G5 is better performance than the PWRficient PA6T-1682M considering how many times more power it draws. The PWRficient PA6T-1682M is a much better CPU than the G5 and would have made a nice laptop for Apple if it had been in production before they switched to x86_64 (rumors are that Apple tested the PWRficient PA6T-1682M before switching but production was too far away). I expect the Core 2 Duo would more than "slightly" outperform the PWRficient PA6T-1682M in CPU intensive tasks but you may be correct for the perceived difference with desktop use.

Quote:

It has aborted before which I prefer but it is rare. Right now, updating FireFox or the kernel made no difference to the multtasking, and it can take the machine down in seconds. There is a sudden thrashing on the HDD while Firefox instanly freezes and seconds later the system as well.

Modern virtual memory paging, memory protection and bloat, priceless. Thrashing drives with paging and the extra heat in a laptop has been really good for the drive manufactures.

@Hypex

that is really annoying. A very similar situation occurs when i take too long to edit a reply, I press "Submit" and since I as I have been logged out automatically everything I typed is gone.
Usually on firefox or Safari I can press the back button and the text is there again..
So I'm using the workaround everybody else here is using..

@matthey

Quote:

I'm surprised broadblues did not mention the editor button in AWeb.

I must be slipping!

AWeb Rulez!

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@matthey

Quote:

I wouldn't call the Core 2 Duo "low spec". Maybe it would be mid performance in the x86_64 world today but it likely has better single core performance than *any* PPC or ARM CPU. The predecessor Core Duo was close to the performance of the PPC G5.

I thought it would be low these days since it's so old in computer years. What is it ten years in computer years is 100 in humans?

And it's limited to 4GB RAM which to me looks pointless when mated to a 64-bit CPU.

You're not makng those PPC chips look good.

But the G5 is almost a third of the transistors as the Core Duo!

If the Core is using way less power then something is majorly wrong with the G5. Considering it's a newer RISC design against a CISC. Or CRISC.

Quote:

The early Core 2 Duo for laptops was roughly 10% better performance than the Core Duo.

So I see. It has a sticker that says Celeron on the outside. But the software says it's a T7100 Core2 Duo. Have a link.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+T7100+%40+1.80GHz&id=999

Quote:

I would hope the G5 is better performance than the PWRficient PA6T-1682M considering how many times more power it draws. The PWRficient PA6T-1682M is a much better CPU than the G5 and would have made a nice laptop for Apple if it had been in production before they switched to x86_64 (rumors are that Apple tested the PWRficient PA6T-1682M before switching but production was too far away). I expect the Core 2 Duo would more than "slightly" outperform the PWRficient PA6T-1682M in CPU intensive tasks but you may be correct for the perceived difference with desktop use.

I compare the Core2 with my PA6T-1682M at first because the CPU clock is the same speed. And the architecture is of similar age. I wonder if there is a Linux program I can run to bench on both Core2 and PA6T? In any case my X1000 CPU has been insulted enough. It's bad enough it has to put up with this Intel optimised software.