My understanding was that the reason IBM was paying a (small) team to work on Mozilla was so that there would exist a functionally up-to-date browser usable on the OS/2 platform (and WSeB and eCS).
IMHO, the number of non-legacy video drivers still being written for OS/2 seems to be _one_ (and even *that* company seems now to be focusing on Windows). Hmmm - a platform whose browser "is best seen with" a particular video driver - should that be pronounced "niche" ? mikus (still using the Matrox video driver - BY CHOICE!) On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:58:14 -0600 Michael Kaply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, the reason it has to do with legacy video drivers appears to > be a limit in the size or complexity of a region. > > In previous Mozilla versions, invalidation was done using rectangles, > but that view manager change made invalidation use platform regions. > > There appears to be a limit to either the size or complexity of > regions on legacy video drivers. > > Mike Kaply > > > Mikus Grinbergs wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:36:20 -0600 Michael Kaply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > > This problem came back when some changes were made to the view manager > > > (cross-platform) > > > > > > At this point we believe it is a limitation in legacy video drivers. We > > > are continuing to investigate. > > > > I hear what you are saying, but I have DIFFICULTY understanding > > how the video driver might be responsible. The overlay problem > > occurs with long pages, but NOT with short pages. Yet the > > __same__ video driver is being called in both instances. > >
