| |
Origyn/OWB on RISC OS |
| |
This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list. |
| |
|
Garry Taylor |
Message #110915, posted by thegman at 18:32, 13/8/2009 |
Member
Posts: 65
|
Hello,
After a long hiatus off RISC OS, I've started to fiddle with VirtualAcorn and I'm interested in the possibilities of getting a good web browser working.
I'm interested in Mozilla Fennec and also Origyn (http://www.sand-labs.org/owb), and I'm thinking OWB might be an interesting port attempt as there is an SDL frontend already available, and also it's been ported to the Amiga, so it does not seem terribly tied to X11, Windows, or Mac.
Before I start to thoroughly waste my time, has anyone had any experience with this browser, or any thoughts as to why a port would be not be viable?
Cheers
Garry |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Poole |
Message #110932, posted by andypoole at 19:27, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110915 |
Posts: 5558
|
Why not help the NetSurf guys out instead?
Andy. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Stewart |
Message #110934, posted by sa110_mk at 19:45, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110915 |
Member
Posts: 144
|
Good Look. Only heard of Fennec.
For me the highlights to look out for in whichever one you decide to port is: -
HTML 4/5 compliance
CSS compliance
Javascript |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Stewart |
Message #110935, posted by sa110_mk at 19:46, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110932 |
Member
Posts: 144
|
Because he wants to port one! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110937, posted by filecore at 20:39, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110935 |
Posts: 3867
|
Sorry, I read the title of this thread as "OB/GYN on RISC OS" and wondered just what the hell was happening at Castle. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Stewart |
Message #110939, posted by sa110_mk at 20:48, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110937 |
Member
Posts: 144
|
Sorry, I read the title of this thread as "OB/GYN on RISC OS" and wondered just what the hell was happening at Castle. Castle - Who are they? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #110940, posted by Acornut at 21:52, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110939 |
 No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
Castle - Who are they? Is this them? 
http://www.castle.uk.com/ |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark |
Message #110941, posted by Mark76 at 23:39, 14/8/2009, in reply to message #110940 |
Posts: 122
|
You can read their website in Cyrillic  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110943, posted by filecore at 07:29, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110941 |
Posts: 3867
|
Heh. I'm assuming the question wasn't posed seriously. Just in case the question was genuine, it's summarised here. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #110944, posted by Acornut at 08:16, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110941 |
No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
You can read their website in Cyrillic And see the pre-production images at Lascaux  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Garry Taylor |
Message #110946, posted by thegman at 16:57, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110932 |
Member
Posts: 65
|
I guess because (maybe misguidedly) I think porting something like OWB is less work than making NetSurf into a capable browser, maybe I'm wrong though.
OWB has been ported to the Amiga, so maybe that chap could give advice about the pros/cons.
If OWB can be ported in a clean-ish manner, then we may automatically have access to the updates and improvements to WebKit. With NetSurf we'd still have to implement all those features ourselves.
Anyway, if I can find the time, I'll have a try at OWB, and report back if I have any success. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Peter Naulls |
Message #110947, posted by pnaulls at 17:06, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110915 |
Member
Posts: 317
|
Well, I've said a great deal on this topic, and most of it's just been ignored, and I fully expect most of this reply to be ignore/endlessly questioned. At least Garry has done _some_ research, but there's much he's missed. And although I wish it weren't so, I'm really the only developer with first hand experience of these topics.
- Whatever else you might think, any "mobile" browser is going to be highly unsatisfactory on a desktop system like RISC OS. Think cut down everything in the UI. Nor does that mean it's "small" in RISC OS terms, nor magically make modern browsing on your 15 year old RiscPC sensible.
- There's only really two comprehensive browser cores out there - Mozilla and Webkit. Fennec and Origyn are on top of these, respectively.
- So the argument for Fennec (based on the same core as current Firefoxes, more or less) versus, say Firefox 3 et al is not good - you still have to do all the same work, and you have a browser which is even less satisfactory in terms of RISC OS UI.
- For webkit, the situation is arguably worse - there's no RISC OS port at this time, and you still need a RISC OS front end (an enormous amount of work, look at NetSurf).
Finally, you still need to find someone to do whatever project you thought you had in mind. Put a time estimate on it, and then multiply it by 10. Also come up with useful definitions of "finished", fight off specious arguments about how Java/Flash are part of the browser, and all the complaints about how it doesn't work on a RiscPC.
If you're going to reply to this, at least quote some references or something, so I can assume you've done some research, not replying with some stuff you made up. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Stewart |
Message #110948, posted by sa110_mk at 17:26, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110947 |
Member
Posts: 144
|
- For webkit, the situation is arguably worse - there's no RISC OS port at this time, and you still need a RISC OS front end (an enormous amount of work, look at NetSurf).
However if this is something he wants to do, then surely let us wish him good luck. Would a webkit port be useful for other stuff?
Alternatively, could he Gary not get involved with your port of Firefox?
Finally, you still need to find someone to do whatever project you thought you had in mind. Put a time estimate on it, and then multiply it by 10. Also come up with useful definitions of "finished", fight off specious arguments about how Java/Flash are part of the browser, and all the complaints about how it doesn't work on a RiscPC. As you have pointed out serveral times to many different people, Java and Flash are not part of the browser, all those who complain, should know better by now. As for it being Risc PC compatible, don't even go there. Simply make sure it is usable on a A9home and Iyonix. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Michael Drake |
Message #110950, posted by tlsa at 17:33, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110946 |
Posts: 1097
|
If OWB can be ported in a clean-ish manner, then we may automatically have access to the updates and improvements to WebKit. With NetSurf we'd still have to implement all those features ourselves. NetSurf's the same as WebKit in that all the RISC OS community needs is a RISC OS front end, and then it can take advantage of all the improvements to NetSurf's core. NetSurf has the advantage that it already has a complete RISC OS front end. It "just" needs someone to maintain it.
Of course, NetSurf's not yet got JavaScript support, but you can see the progress towards that on the development plan. Completing LibDOM is where we are at the moment, and you can see the progress towards that on the NetSurf development wiki too.
[Edited by tlsa at 17:34, 15/8/2009] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Peter Naulls |
Message #110952, posted by pnaulls at 17:42, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110948 |
Member
Posts: 317
|
- For webkit, the situation is arguably worse - there's no RISC OS port at this time, and you still need a RISC OS front end (an enormous amount of work, look at NetSurf).
However if this is something he wants to do, then surely let us wish him good luck.
How about we start with some reality, rather than platitudes. And then if the plan makes sense, you can worry about good will.
Would a webkit port be useful for other stuff?
So much for the research I asked for.
Alternatively, could he Gary not get involved with your port of Firefox?
Wrong question. Why is it, after all these years, that no else has done any work on it (apart from some small contributions from JT and AB ).
Finally, you still need to find someone to do whatever project you thought you had in mind. Put a time estimate on it, and then multiply it by 10. Also come up with useful definitions of "finished", fight off specious arguments about how Java/Flash are part of the browser, and all the complaints about how it doesn't work on a RiscPC. As you have pointed out serveral times to many different people, Java and Flash are not part of the browser, all those who complain, should know better by now.
And yet they don't - again, platitudes don't work here. These people still have to be dealt with as part of any development. Wishing them away is no good. Nor will ignoring all the other issues I named. It's easy to pick at bits of my reply with superficial answers, but unless you have a complete answer to all the parts, then you don't have a plan. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110961, posted by filecore at 19:04, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110952 |
Posts: 3867
|
Platitudes work well in motivating people to do research and think of solutions. Pompous fuckwits like yourself, experience aside, are more likely to make people give up on the whole thing. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Peter Naulls |
Message #110962, posted by pnaulls at 19:26, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110961 |
Member
Posts: 317
|
Right, and this is _exactly_ the childish name calling that anyone has to put up with, simply because they know what they're on about.
Like I said, it is a waste of my time trying to explain the issues, when there's so much effort from the likes of you to resist change and education.
Go on, swear at me again - I promise it'll make you feel better. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110964, posted by filecore at 19:40, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110962 |
Posts: 3867
|
Do you suffer physical pain when trying to be in any way polite or reasonable in dealing with other people? Because I can't think of any other reason why you can't seem to managing being either polite or reasonable.
And no, it's not "simply because you know what you're on about". Lots of people know what they're on about and manage not to be a prat at the same time. You could perhaps try to offer your god-like expertise without being condescending to everyone around you at the same time, and then you might have some success. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Peter Naulls |
Message #110965, posted by pnaulls at 19:46, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110964 |
Member
Posts: 317
|
Everyone can now thank you for polluting this conversation with your personal agenda. Sorry you can't see fit to actually comment on the issue at hand.
> you might have some success.
Success at what at pissing you off? Looks like I've done a pretty good job. Do you want me to try harder?
Despite what you might think, this attitude is an excellent reason why there are almost no developers left for RISC OS, and why it should be no surprise that the NetSurf developers are having such trouble finding someone, and certainly what Garry would be up against if he were to attempt anything.
Do you want to go 3 for 3 on the insults, or perhaps you want to apologise to Garry (who's clearly genuinely interested in the topic) for your shocking behaviour? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110966, posted by filecore at 19:47, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110964 |
Posts: 3867
|
P.S. sorry if I hurt your feelings by typing a Bad Word. I really didn't want to make you feel any more of a martyr than you already are. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110967, posted by filecore at 19:50, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110965 |
Posts: 3867
|
Everyone can now thank you for polluting this conversation with your personal agenda. Be the big man and stop replying to me then. And go back to helping these developers with such heart-warming, angst-ridden gems as "I've said a great deal on this topic, and most of it's just been ignored, and I fully expect most of this reply to be ignore/endlessly questioned". Honestly, I almost expected tears at the end of that sentence. And you wonder why people lose interest in these things - except, by some strange coincidence, you. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Rob Kendrick |
Message #110972, posted by nunfetishist at 20:47, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110965 |
 Today's phish is trout a la creme.
Posts: 522
|
Despite what you might think, this attitude is an excellent reason why there are almost no developers left for RISC OS, and why it should be no surprise that the NetSurf developers are having such trouble finding someone, and certainly what Garry would be up against if he were to attempt anything. Chocky, your attitude causes as much damage. Do not try to deflect criticism from your complete lack of online social skills by pulling that card. You are cretinous, rude, impolite, impatient, and generally an arsehole of the highest order. And to also go and bitch about developers leaving, when I can't think of a single thing for RISC OS that you've finished or lived up to your hype (who remembers Chockicino?) is frankly staggering.
Unless you have something more useful to say than "I know what I'm talking about, now all obey me", then kindly sod off. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #110974, posted by Acornut at 21:04, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110967 |
No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
So Gary what have you learnt from this thread?
1.Why would you want to port a 'virtual' browser, when native ones on other platforms work fine?
Other than, you like the idea, and doubtless if you do it, judging from the length of time programming takes, we will here about your success in about 25 years time!!
2. Netsurf are desperate for a riscos front end maintainer.
3. Firefox, has a single-minded totally dedicated maintainer, that Netsurf would kill for.
4.The Iron Lord, can't read. (heh he)
5.Mark can read Cyrillic ( Impressive, or what!)
6.Paul WAS fibbing about Castle.
7.Rob is likly to expose us morons.
8.Platitudes rule OK! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Mark |
Message #110977, posted by Mark76 at 22:04, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110974 |
Posts: 122
|
Just because I can recognise the Cyrillic script, it doesn't necessarily follow that I can read it  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Poole |
Message #110979, posted by andypoole at 22:33, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110972 |
Posts: 5558
|
(who remembers Chockicino?) Archive.org does
Andy.
(edit)Archive also remembers an even older version of the page, complete with screenshots...
[Edited by andypoole at 22:40, 15/8/2009] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Simon Willcocks |
Message #110980, posted by Stoppers at 22:36, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110974 |
Member
Posts: 302
|
6.Paul WAS fibbing about Castle.
Huh? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #110981, posted by Acornut at 22:53, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110980 |
No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
6.Paul WAS fibbing about Castle.
Huh?
Well, I figured, when he said
Castle - Who are they? And Jason was kind enough to
....Just in case the question was genuine ... followed by Pauls'
.....Simply make sure it is usable on a A9home and Iyonix. 'Elementary my dear Watson.'
Paul new, who Castle were, all the time! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Paul Stewart |
Message #110982, posted by sa110_mk at 23:31, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110980 |
Member
Posts: 144
|
Ok, Blind Moose was right. i was just being sarcastic!
Castle was the company tjhat brought us (or was it ripped off from Pace?) the Iyonix with RISC OS 5 (wasn't that also ripped off fom Pace at the time?), then once they sucked the market dry(JB ot JL as the cash sucking vampire?) for as much cash as possible, they simply vanished *poof* in to thin air. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #110983, posted by filecore at 23:37, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110982 |
Posts: 3867
|
or was it ripped off from Pace? [...] the Iyonix with RISC OS 5 (wasn't that also ripped off fom Pace at the time?) [...] they sucked the market dry [...] cash sucking vampire [...] they simply vanished *poof* in to thin air. But no hard feelings, eh? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #110986, posted by Acornut at 23:51, 15/8/2009, in reply to message #110982 |
No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
.... they simply vanished *poof* in to thin air. Possibly a little harsh. Might have had more to do with the EEC directive on PCB's. Me thinks. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
| Pages (2): 1
> >|
|
