Reaction OWB better than MUIOWB?

Quote:
That's not a fair criticism, since it is not intended to be fast in it's current state (they wanted to get it stable before making it fast).

Still, MUI-OWB/Odyssey is the best browser currently available (not future promises). I wonder why Kas1e can't simply apply "OS4 patches" to more recent versions of Odyssey source code, since Fab seems to think this should be easy.

i agree with Chris, MUI OWB is the BEST amiga browser at the moment! Please Roman, upgrade the OS4 version at the same version of MorphOS ! We do really need this application, thanks

Quote:

I do realise this ChrisH, but the beta (alpha?) has been out for years now with hardly any updates really, when was the last one? Over a year ago? Even if it ever does get finished, I still can't imagine it'd run very well on most OS4 platforms, even on Windows Firefox is pretty heavy on the system. The UI is also really Linux-like, it's an alien app, and it shows. MUI-OWB is an Amiga program though, it's like a modern version of IBrowse.

As I mentioned, I think the time has passed anyway, Firefox is really on its way out now. It would have been cool if it was released 5 years ago, but the rest of the world is moving to Webkit, luckily we already have a very decent webkit browser.

Quote:

I think you're a bit premature there; I ran a university website up until about a year ago and the proportion of external traffic that was firefox was higher than all the other browsers, IE included. Firefox really isn't going to disappear anytime soon.

billy

@ChrisH

Quote:
Agreed.
Maybe (and I really mean maybe) someone else should look at it.

Quote:
Perhaps it'd be a good idea to set up a real collaboration effort with open SVN and stuff, to allow more people to contribute.

Its hard (and boring) to did it after you've successfully compiled and built/ported something. Often you tend to do a bit here and there locally, and then stumble upon a configuration that works, but is highly dependent on your local configuration. A real effort that aims for collaboration would be ideal.

@Danwood

Quote:
No, they have Fab. We don't.

@Chris_H

Quote:
Because Roman wants money.

I am not waiting anymore for any new version of MUI-OWB for AmigaOS 4.1 (I'd better buy a PowerMac G5 and use THE original thing).

I'm still hoping for a faster TimberWolf version since even on my G4 1.26 Ghz it's barely usable (even when using the Altivec optimized libcairo from RC-2).

NetSurf has for sure a huge potential but there's a long way from here before it could become my main browser.

MUI-OWB on AmigaOS 4.1 crashes too much here unfortunately (I only navgate on my OS4.1 system and not only on Amiga centric websites).

@K-L

Quote:

It's not exactly that, Roman didn't want money just to receive money, he liked to receive an incentive to split with all the other developers involved .. it's a bit different if you ask me

Quote:

Me too, but at some point i lost the hope, they (the Friedens) are unuble to mantain any normal communication with the Amiga community, i'm very tired to wait years without receive any communications from their project nor any normal bugfix

What it "funny" is read the Trevor blog and discover that their are working on another huge project (LibreOffice) while we are waitig for Timberwolf and Warp3D for the RadeonHD cards ...

Anyway according the the Timberwolf bounty:

Quote:

10 months since latest release are already passed ..

Quote:
So where is the bounty web site? I didn't notice any AW.net news item in my RSS feed reader...

(P.S. There has been a lot of daft things said about Firefox/Timberwolf on this thread, but I have better things to do than argue about it.)

Quote:
Timberwolf is a SPARE TIME *PERSONAL* PROJECT of the Friedens, where-as Warp3D & LibreOffice are OFFICIAL PAID JOBS. The Warp3D stuff has not been worked on for that long (but seems to be going well according to the blog), while the LibreOffice is clearly a long-term project.

Quote:

Anecdotal evidence aside, Chrome has over double the number of users than Firefox now. Global stats show it's falling every quarter though, and has been for the last 3 years or so:

http://gs.statcounter.com/

Firefox has just dropped under 20% for the first time, now down to 19.7% while Chrome continues to rise up to 41.3%, Webkit is clearly the direction the industry is moving in.

@ChrisH

Quote:

It seems we are waiting from Troels ..

Kas1e have you got any news about the possibility to open such bounty and if not do you have any other solution ?

@samo79 Quote:
I was told that months (if not 6 months) ago. There must be several alternate possibilities for creating a bounty, so I don't see this as the real reason not updating OWB. There MUST be other reasons, even if it is (as it appears from the outside) that Kas1e has just lost interest in OWB (even with the prospect of money).

Well beside the bounty crap actually he is still busy with other projects (Magellan first), so i will not jump at any bad conclusion ..

But for sure i really like a new version now, i'm a bit bored to wait as you

@K-L
Quote:

In other words Roman bad and wants money on work done by another. That what you mean right ? I.e. Roman sucker who do not want to loose all his time to make a port of browser from another os, while he not programmer, while he have no interest to be a programmer, but do it because another ones can only ask, chill and say that only os4 true-teh-omg os ? And be in hope that someone else will do what can do anyone if only have a bit of energy and just ability to talk with another ppls ?

Taking aside that all this sucking "because kas1e wants money" mean "kas1e want money to send it to developers and not for yourself". I repeat it many times everywhere, but still some of you want to see me like a faggot who want money and nothing else. Like i am here because of money. MONEY ! Amiga and money, don't you found it funny ? I am sure in FR you guys not so poor and have at least 1-2-3k per mo, and so you still call time consuming and time wasting projects for which someone want money (to split it between all developers to motivate them, i note it again, yes, so you will see why) a "money" ? Are you for real ? You guys happy to spend thousands on expensive HW and then think that SW will appears magical without any single income ? A bit of too much, nope ?

@Elwood
Quote:

Maybe there is no sane and time-free persons left anymore who just put pieces in one puzzle and just finish stuff ?Maybe there is no developers at all who want to worry with porting browser because they have bunch of agendas of different kind ? Maybe Elwood want to do that ?:) Or who else you mean ? Everyone who have skills keep busy for everything, but there is not many of them anymore, sadly.

I will be only happy if someone will just do one normal browser for os4, be it port or whatever. And i didn't mean that sluggish firefox with "its not just a browser , its technology". I see enough of developing speed on those projects. Its all even worse in end as i think before. It takes not 1-2 years, but 5-7 for simply things which done on another oses for months.

Sad truth is there is almost no more developers left. With all that agendas about "we not want port os4 to mac because of blablalb", we suck some boing balls in end, and such task as porting of browser do person who know nothing about coding (i.e. me) till his peg2 not die.

@ChrisH
Quote:

Does not matter at all how to call it all. Official, smacificial, personal, not personal. Its all very slow in all the cases. Its unreal slow developing of everything. Simply task take years (=> fail).

Quote:

I never have any interest in it, but in some time i was in hope that muiowb can be ported with all the stuff. But all that mambo-jambo with html5 player and other deps, make me think that os4 version will be always worse, and in end of all, its just maybe indeed better to buy cheap mac with morphos and use it ?

@Fab
Quote:

Is that morphos cvs public ? I assume of course not. That mean, does not matter what it have, no one except you have access to, no one can apply any patches and just simply recompile for aos4/aros. Of course it suck to maintain different branches, but i see no other solutions if you have interest to have it on all amiga likes. It can be so much easy when i just can ask you on some SF forum "hey fab, is it ok to apply such code?" you say "ok", and i do commit. And that ifdef keeps in code for all the time, and no one will need to reimplement a wheels again and again with every new version. Its just time consuming and non-interesting. With such commits everything will be in end very easy for everyone later. You can add as commiters only those who port it, with words "ok, guys, any commit only with asking me before". And no problems.

Quote:

How can you say that :) Don't you remember how much of small problems happens which not happens on mos, and which arise with every new version ? All that crap about tabs (code of which you for sure change from time to time, so now will need to understand new code, to be able to reuse our replacement), about all those player related parts with loosing ifdefs, which ok for mos, but make a black problems on os4, about those functions which make a garbage on os4 when they not strduped (and you for sure add bunch of new of them in different places, but not one can see where, because there is no public svn), about those "static/non static" problems which happens on some parts , and only on os4, about rewriting all those "createtasks" and crap, which i do not remember where in all the code they are, about new adding code related to pointers (there was some for sure), about those random crashes which happens only on os4, and to fix which i loose month or so, about every new single added line which make old "patches" just do not works and which will make new problems 100%. And you for sure create some new and tons (really tons) small other moments, in which again need to dig in together with all old problems.

If only there was idefs already in code, its all will be very easy to fix _new_ moments. But now, when i will get new src, its all will be the same old dances for a weeks, to making again the same and the same (half of which i just do not remember, and how can i remember code done not by me ?).

Don't forget also how much of 3d party libs you use, and sources of which i also need, because you know that i am not programmer and all those curls, fontconfigs, libcairo/libpixman and all the other libs which have specific morphos changes also need it , to make a proper port. Without them, i again stuck with my buggy ports of those deps, which i need again report in new versions, and i do not know them as well and i will need to loose a lot of time on them too, as before.

And i don't say that you use now shared libraries code of which are not open too. What to do with them ? Disable functionality ? The same as html5 player (which in general, was the #1 motivation for me to make a port, and later i just realize that you can't give that code for anyone. Its all like just give half of candy. Without html5 player muiowb not that interesting).

Quote:

Still you change it, still it will conflicts, still if will need programmer's work, while i am not programmer and you know it. If it will be on public svn, then i can ask anyone for help, then discuss commits with you, and everything will be easy and done. For now, its all pretty hard to maintain for anything except mos. Patches will not works, because code changes, new bugs will happens, and with every new snapshot i will need to do the same again and again, which can be done one time, then followed on SVN, and changes can be indeed easy, small and trivial.

And i forget to mention that for every new version you something changes in compilation as well, like 'make' options, which i also need somehow to understand without knowing what they do and for what.

Without public SVN its all will be like this all the time. I just really was in hope that when i done one time with it, all ifdefs will be in code, and there will be no problems for later recompiled, but in end it force to be pretty boring work of doing the same again and again. Its all of course much easy in compare with first port, but still.

@Danwood

No, firefox is not going to disappear any
time soon. Look at this graph from today Arstechnica.

Arstechnica

@kas1e
Quote:
Trixie seemed interested, or it's just me being too optimistic

@elwood

Quote:
I'm not - what I meant was that if anybody had full, working, compilable sources to RA-OWB, I could contribute GUI-related stuff like a bookmark editor etc.

Just to counter some of the nonsense said about Firefox, here are a few things I happened to come across:

http://www.osnews.com/story/27161/Fir ... _the_new_king_of_the_hill
"For the first time, Firefox 22 pulls off a truly decisive win against Google's browser. Chrome, once known for starting up instantly, has become the slowest browser to launch, allowing Firefox 22's lightning-fast startup times to create a wide spread between these two otherwise equally-matched browsers. Chrome's historically poor ability to properly render many pages at once also became a problem for the world's new favorite web browser, as Firefox 22 sees the return of rock solid reliable page renders."

http://www.internetnews.com/blog/sker ... ox-process-threading.html
"Mozilla developers have done alot of great work to get the memory footprint and overall memory and process utilization to be highly optimized."

http://www.ghacks.net/2013/04/17/mozi ... -e10s-back-from-the-dead/
"Today, Firefox is faster, leaner and slimmer than ever before and while the optimizations will continue"

(Crawling back under my stone now, until I have time to read the posts after my last post...)

Quote:


While this is how Friedens brothers judge their commitment, its fair to say Timberwolf is also a bounty paid development. Was it a realistic payment for the job can be discussed, but browser is ported to beta state.

Problem is, as explained, that browser (and office) are critical tools for day to day use, and no matter how great OS is, without decent browser (and office) its merely a fun to use.