Tell me something I don't already know. TimberWolf must be close to completion.
"must-be" and reality are different :) I can give you my word: if you will try right now to use TW on aos4, you will say "holly crap, it works, but how buggy is it". It always give you crashes, freeze of system, bugs, some sites just not loads, connection drops from time to time, menu navigation not works by mouse (wrong chords, should use keyboard only), options (for example) are totally mess, you just can't see many options name. Yes, it works, and yes, it can be good when it will be done. But that what we have for now: buggy TW, and OWB which are "empty". That is reasson why we all talk about port of morphos OWB.
Must to say, that for making that picture for you which you put on your site (some north site), i trying to make 2 or 3 times. First time it freeze os. Second time it buggy renders, and on 3st time it was "ok". That really far from being usable.
I am sure OWB is great and everything, but lets not lose sight of Timberwolf being around the corner. I am fairly sure the author of OWB must be thinking 'is it really worth me developing OWB any further with the world's most popular browser arriving shortly on the Amiga platform?'
That's not the case as Firefox on OS4 was officially announced in September 2009 and OWB is around since December 2007, since then nothing was done in term of features, yes some improvment was done in speed and stability but nothing more ...
Also competition is good, having a good port of OWB and Firefox on the same machine would be always better than "forcing" the community to choose only 1 product
But to stay real *actually we have only an Alpha bin of Firefox (that isn't really usable) and a plain OWB ...
into this dir you must unpack the cross compiler. You will have:
/usr/local/amiga/ppc-amigaos
into this dir you must install the SDK dir and you will have
/usr/local/amiga/ppc-amigaos/SDK/ with
local/newlib/include local/newlib/lib local/clib2/include (nedeed if you want to use also clib2) local/clib2/lib (nedeed if you want to use also clib2) local/common/include (optional) local/common/lib (optional) newlib clib2 (nedeed if you want to use also clib2)
that's all
you should be able to compile a simply file using:
ppc-amigaos-gcc test.c -o test
you must use always ppc-amigaos- prefix to use cross commands (like ar, ranlib, ld and so on..)
all others command like gawk, lex and so on will remain linux native To compile OWB you need cmake and a toolchain to cross compile
For me everything points on MUI knowlege. I know nothing about. But still, maybe will be better to try to compile, and post all the problems to forum, and step by step it can be done..
Yes this is a good idea, we can use this thread to share the eventual progress so other developers/users can share opinion, suggest, code and so on ....
I am fairly sure the author of OWB must be thinking 'is it really worth me developing OWB any further with the world's most popular browser arriving shortly on the Amiga platform?'
I hope not, OWB is to very stable, fast and has a small footprint on OS4. It's still early days for Timberwolf an dit has yet to prove itself in my opinion.
OWB is around since December 2007, since then nothing was done in term of features
Then you haven't been looking closely enough! We've had lots of new features. e.g. Menus, pop-up menus, ability to save/load local files, display of source, copy/paste, search bar, status bar, tabs (!), more buttons, ability to download files, HTTPS support, pop-up login requester support, etc.
Joerg has put a LOT of work into OWB, and don't underestimate how much work debugging it has been. I really appreciate Joerg's efforts - OWB is now a nice & usable browser. All it misses are a few small things like password manager & better bookmark organisation. A download manager is very low down my priorities, because there are easy work-arounds.
Well understimate ? Maybe I overestimate it as the initial port was done by afxgroup, the download was introduced thanks to Śmiechowicz (from AROS port in Sand-labs CVS), graphics was done by Mason and contributors, bookmark was done by a Greek guy, StringView was done thanks to Rigo etc ...
@ChrisH Totally agree! Joerg has done an amazing job as has Fab on the MOS version However people should remember the 2 OS' are quite different beasts now, I am sure given time OWB will start to gain some of the features available in MOS but Joerg could probably use some help to achieve this.
I for one use OWB all the time with no big difficulties, I use Netsurf when I want to download and keep track, Netsurf by the way is a nifty product as well and I hope that keeps getting updated as well given it is cross platform (ie other minor platforms get something as well).
People should also remember Joerg contributes a lot more than just OWB to the OS4 community I guess he prioritises as he sees fit and on what he is willing to work on for his own satisfaction, he ain't in it for the money.
Sometimes I get real embarrassed by some of the expectations of our little community.
Perhaps some posters can ask how can we help or contribute.
However people should remember the 2 OS' are quite different beasts now
Why ? Because MorphOS use MUI ? We have MUI aswell so I don't see any big difference on this aspect ...
Quote:
I am sure given time OWB will start to gain some of the features available in MOS but Joerg could probably use some help to achieve this.
Oh surely, but you may know also that the future release will be targetting for plain AmigaOS 4.0 so forget new features, if you didn't fellow the bugtracker you can not understand ...
Quote:
People should also remember Joerg contributes a lot more than just OWB to the OS4 community I guess he prioritises as he sees fit and on what he is willing to work on for his own satisfaction, he ain't in it for the money.
I don't blame anyone, surely I don't blame Joerg for his very good contribution over OS4, i'm just tired with our OWB port
Quote:
Sometimes I get real embarrassed by some of the expectations of our little community.
Our litte community is maybe larger than the blue one, but the MorphOS community have a excellent OWB port ...
While everyone will say only "cool, great, keep it up , good work, thanks!" for every programm, developers will not make it better and better for users (for users, not for yourself). If programm have problems and users want something from programm - there is nothing wrong to ask about. I cant be wrong, but did you make that torrent-kind programm which have ability only provide the torernt link in argument, and not from the programm itself, and on ask about add ability to run programm, and choice from menu a "open a link" you say that is not important ? But maybe i wrong and its not you, but if i right, then i can understand why you happy with anything :)
Everyone agree, that better have that OWB which we have for now, if compare with nothing, But, _that is not enough_. Download manager are must. All users ask about it. Joerg say that - its trivial work to do, but still, where is download manager if its so easy ? Joerg have it low priotity ? Lets be, but then, not need to say why some users write that and that, and say that Joerg a bit out from logic there.
That is opinion of many users - browser should have Download Manager. Strange that it need to write here, because everyone understand that. And Fab do OWB as it should be already, so, that is very-very understanable why many of us already say about port of OWB from morphos, and more of it, some of us already trying to start with it. I just not have time exactly right now, but i will try to port MOS version of OWB to AOS4, just because i see how it can be, and how fast Fab works on it (and also, on other thinks too, and not only on OWB). Or maybe TW will be for that time already stable and without bugs (what is less hope to be honest, just because it huge work, and brothers in heavy work with x1000 for now imho).
Lets be a bit more critical, it will help to make our OS and apps more modern, and not like strange amiga logic from retarted minds.
Lets be a bit more critical, it will help to make our OS and apps more modern
But some people vastly exaggerate the problems/criticisms, and make it sound like OWB is a pile of c**p, which is ridiculous & also hurtful/demotivating I think. A lot of effort has gone into OWB, and we should give some time to thank the developers, rather than moaning *all* the time.
By all means make short & polite constructive criticisms, but don't harass the developers about the same issues, because they will just stop appearing/responding in public (and maybe even loose motivation to program due to only receiving criticisms all the time).
I am sure that Joerg/etc does what he can, given his available time. He appears to put bug fixing first, and I think this is correct. But now that OWB is pretty stable, I hope he will put more effort into new features...
P.S. I repeat again, a download manager should not be a high priority, because that can be handled by a separate app. I personally suggest using HTTP Resume from Aminet.
But some people vastly exaggerate the problems/criticisms, and make it sound like OWB is a pile of c**p, which is ridiculous & also hurtful/demotivating I think.
Who say that ?
Quote:
I am sure that Joerg/etc does what he can, given his available time. He appears to put bug fixing first, and I think this is correct. But now that OWB is pretty stable, I hope he will put more effort into new features...
And in all this (long) period who find and posted the majority of bug reports ? A lot of bug is again here, some bug was not fixed completely or come back magically after fixing, some features works in a very strange method, for example try to save into hard disk a simple webpage, it doesn't copy images/css just the plain HTML (!?)
We are not talking about a complete software with say 10.000 complex features, we are talking about a custom core + 4 things ...
BTW "Hope" and "reality" are different things and personally after 2 year i'm switching on Windows to browse internet
Quote:
P.S. I repeat again, a download manager should not be a high priority, because that can be handled by a separate app. I personally suggest using HTTP Resume from Aminet.
Maybe for you but not for me, hey we are in 2010 not in 1990 ! ...
Aniway it's a wasting time, if you like it use it, no problem at all ...
P.S. Just resizing the OWB window with latest Tantignone's Theme
I didn't know it was even possible to compile owb on os4.
Ain't that harder to do? and slower???
Quote:
afxgroup wrote: @Antique
because OWB has changed revision. And while i was using CMake with cross compiler, Joerg has always produced the and used the standard Makefiles and has compiled OWB on OS4 and so he has never patched CMakeLists.txt to add OS4 platofrms to it
for example try to save into hard disk a simple webpage, it doesn't copy images/css just the plain HTML (!?)
This is standard behavior for "HTML only" saves, even with Firefox on Windows. What you want is a new feature, but I imagine it won't get very high priority.
Quote:
Who say that ?
I don't bother noting down their names...
Quote:
who find and posted the majority of bug reports ?
No idea. I don't keep track of that kind of thing.
P.S. I think you severly underestimate the complexity of the core of a modern web browser. Integrating one into any new OS is a hard job, never mind all the peripheral stuff that people want added on to it. But OWB is really well done now, seems very optimised (fast), and rarely (if ever) crashes.
@ChrisH You are right about complexity and alt, but did you ever try morphos version of latest OWB ? (i have latest morphos with latest OWB, and while it complex of course and hard done job - i see the very big differences beetwen). And there is nothing so Morphos specific , everything the same can be done in the same time and way as Fab do. Just Fab is Fab, and Joerg is Joerg. Everyone do what they want and have their priorites in mind about browsers.
Anyway, its all a bit offtopic already, when we will start on morphos OWB port, we will create a new thread about.
MorphOS uses MUI4 thats a different beast compared to MUI 3.9.
Yes but we talked about OWB MUI not the OS itself, it is quite portable with some "modifications"
@ChrisH
Quote:
This is standard behavior for "HTML only" saves, even with Firefox on Windows. What you want is a new feature, but I imagine it won't get very high priority.
No, other browser save all contents, HTML file + images and CSS ("Save page with name" option on Firefox)
I don't know different behaviour on Firefox ...
Quote:
P.S. I think you severly underestimate the complexity of the core of a modern web browser. Integrating one into any new OS is a hard job,
Off course by Afxgroup ...
Quote:
But OWB is really well done now, seems very optimised (fast), and rarely (if ever) crashes.
Agree here, but OWB is now stable (and have some minor features) only because we (2 or 3 of us) pass entire nights to report them with details, sorry but you can't know ...
News feed
OS4 Feedback forum
OS4Depot Feedback forum
Amigabounty forum
OpenAmiga forum
AmiCygnix forum
ABC shell forum
AmiKit forum
Cinnamon Writer forum
CodeBench forum
Digital Universe forum
Dopus 5 forum
E-UAE forum
Gnash forum
Ibrowse forum
JAmiga forum
Odyssey forum
OWB forum
Qt forum
SmartFileSystem forum
Timberwolf forum
TouchDevice forum
TuneNet forum
Unsatisfactory Software forum
Donate
TimberWolf must be close to completion.
