Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
Tuukka Tolvanen wrote: On 5/10/08, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing I've noticed is that there seems to be some kind of proxy thing going on when I try to go to a Web site: instead of just going directly to the site I selected, there's some sort of "wysiwyg.something" address that shows in the address bar. Is it attempting to show us a WAP page or something before referring the real one? google is somewhat helpful, once you turn off the spellcheck in your goggles ;) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYCIWYG 't. :-) Thanks for enlightening me. I knew it wasn't quite WYSIWIG, but it doesn't show all the time, and it didn't stay on screen long enough the times I noticed it to catch the correct spelling. I've never seen it show up on any of my other Mozilla installations. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On 5/10/08, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing I've noticed is that there seems to be some kind of proxy thing going on when I try to go to a Web site: instead of just going directly to the site I selected, there's some sort of wysiwyg.something address that shows in the address bar. Is it attempting to show us a WAP page or something before referring the real one? google is somewhat helpful, once you turn off the spellcheck in your goggles ;) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYCIWYG 't. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
Hi, ext John Holmblad wrote: All, for those who have not already seen the article whose url is: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080409-first-look-mozilla-fennec-targets-handheld-browser-market.html It provides a comparison of the performance of Microb versus Fennec on the N810. Fennec shows a ~6x speed improvement for javascript. Yes, the numbers of these automated tests are right. However, users having used both browsers will probably agree that in terms of real user experience as for today both are pretty similar, and even the Nokia version is performing better in real use conditions. I'm talking about my own experience and comments I've heard. What is your opinion? I'm sure both Nokia and Mozilla developers are interested to know. Is someone lying? Not at all. It's just a matter of looking at the details. The current MicroB engine was developed one year ago by Nokia starting with a pre-alpha of the latest Gecko engine, the freshest code available by then. The release under development done last Summer put a Mozilla based browser at a level where nobody could before (including the own Mozilla guys, who were happily surprised btw). Now Fennec is shipping a most recent Gecko and of course putting both one by side you get nowadays much better performance at engine level. How much MicroB's open source code helped on that, I don't know but I guess it saved them some work. But users don't deal with engines alone, you have the UI in between and this is where the Mozilla browser in Chinook and Fennec differ most: the first uses an own UI providing -as for today- much better performance that XUL, a component that seems like needing more work before being really fit in mobile devices. Are we going to keep this difference in the future? Time we tell. Both teams have a lot of work to do anyway. But in fact the best part of this Mozilla browsers comparison is not the numbers competition part but the human collaboration part. The Mozilla and Nokia developers are collaborating and both projects are in sync. The current development of the Mozilla browser for Diablo+1 is based directly on the Gecko trunk and we are discussing ways of deepening the collaboration, also at a community level. Imagine the wide community of Firefox add-on developers targeting the maemo platform - that would be fun. We are even having some common exercises of exploration, both sides learning a lot i.e. Qt support - http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/05/06/well-isnt-that-qt/ Conclusion: We are as happy as you seeing the performance progress done by the Fennec project. We feel honored by them targeting our platform in the first place. Nokia is doing the right thing with the Mozilla development. Lots of potential for collaboration and cool stuff. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But users don't deal with engines alone, you have the UI in between and this is where the Mozilla browser in Chinook and Fennec differ most: the first uses an own UI providing -as for today- much better performance that XUL, a component that seems like needing more work before being really fit in mobile devices. Are we going to keep this difference in the future? This is actually where the Mozilla version has a very distinct advantage: they plan to support plug-ins, and there will be much more functionality. The current MicroB has some serious shortcomings in that area. There are some rather basic and important settings and functionality that are missing from MicroB. If you're going to call it an Internet Tablet, and claim that is its only purpose, then you'd better make sure that it can deliver fully on that promise. From my experience with Fennec, as well as the screen shots I've seen, the UI is a non-issue: Fennec already appears hildonized out of the box, and anyway one of the main areas that Mozilla is working on is to make their browsers appear more native regardless of what OS they are installed in. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
I love the Fennec browser though it could clearly use less memory, be more stable and launch more quickly. ;) It can actually render my Google Reader page which MicroB cannot ... I find it super responsive and hope we see it packaged in a future release. What I understood from the original Ars piece on the topic was that they are pretty close relatives, but that Fennec benefits from a later code base which seems to really make quite the difference. For every day use though I am running MicroB as it is far more reliable at the moment. JG On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, ext John Holmblad wrote: All, for those who have not already seen the article whose url is: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080409-first-look-mozilla-fennec-targets-handheld-browser-market.html It provides a comparison of the performance of Microb versus Fennec on the N810. Fennec shows a ~6x speed improvement for javascript. Yes, the numbers of these automated tests are right. However, users having used both browsers will probably agree that in terms of real user experience as for today both are pretty similar, and even the Nokia version is performing better in real use conditions. I'm talking about my own experience and comments I've heard. What is your opinion? I'm sure both Nokia and Mozilla developers are interested to know. Is someone lying? Not at all. It's just a matter of looking at the details. The current MicroB engine was developed one year ago by Nokia starting with a pre-alpha of the latest Gecko engine, the freshest code available by then. The release under development done last Summer put a Mozilla based browser at a level where nobody could before (including the own Mozilla guys, who were happily surprised btw). Now Fennec is shipping a most recent Gecko and of course putting both one by side you get nowadays much better performance at engine level. How much MicroB's open source code helped on that, I don't know but I guess it saved them some work. But users don't deal with engines alone, you have the UI in between and this is where the Mozilla browser in Chinook and Fennec differ most: the first uses an own UI providing -as for today- much better performance that XUL, a component that seems like needing more work before being really fit in mobile devices. Are we going to keep this difference in the future? Time we tell. Both teams have a lot of work to do anyway. But in fact the best part of this Mozilla browsers comparison is not the numbers competition part but the human collaboration part. The Mozilla and Nokia developers are collaborating and both projects are in sync. The current development of the Mozilla browser for Diablo+1 is based directly on the Gecko trunk and we are discussing ways of deepening the collaboration, also at a community level. Imagine the wide community of Firefox add-on developers targeting the maemo platform - that would be fun. We are even having some common exercises of exploration, both sides learning a lot i.e. Qt support - http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/05/06/well-isnt-that-qt/ Conclusion: We are as happy as you seeing the performance progress done by the Fennec project. We feel honored by them targeting our platform in the first place. Nokia is doing the right thing with the Mozilla development. Lots of potential for collaboration and cool stuff. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- Jonathan Greene +1.914.750.8740 AIM / iChat - atmasphere gtalk / jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype / Gizmo - JonathanGreene blogs - http://www.atmasphere.net/wp / http://www.maemoapps.com ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
That's weird, MicroB opens my Google Reader page with no issue at all, and is actually quite fast. -- anidel On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Jonathan Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love the Fennec browser though it could clearly use less memory, be more stable and launch more quickly. ;) It can actually render my Google Reader page which MicroB cannot ... I find it super responsive and hope we see it packaged in a future release. What I understood from the original Ars piece on the topic was that they are pretty close relatives, but that Fennec benefits from a later code base which seems to really make quite the difference. For every day use though I am running MicroB as it is far more reliable at the moment. JG On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, ext John Holmblad wrote: All, for those who have not already seen the article whose url is: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080409-first-look-mozilla-fennec-targets-handheld-browser-market.html It provides a comparison of the performance of Microb versus Fennec on the N810. Fennec shows a ~6x speed improvement for javascript. Yes, the numbers of these automated tests are right. However, users having used both browsers will probably agree that in terms of real user experience as for today both are pretty similar, and even the Nokia version is performing better in real use conditions. I'm talking about my own experience and comments I've heard. What is your opinion? I'm sure both Nokia and Mozilla developers are interested to know. Is someone lying? Not at all. It's just a matter of looking at the details. The current MicroB engine was developed one year ago by Nokia starting with a pre-alpha of the latest Gecko engine, the freshest code available by then. The release under development done last Summer put a Mozilla based browser at a level where nobody could before (including the own Mozilla guys, who were happily surprised btw). Now Fennec is shipping a most recent Gecko and of course putting both one by side you get nowadays much better performance at engine level. How much MicroB's open source code helped on that, I don't know but I guess it saved them some work. But users don't deal with engines alone, you have the UI in between and this is where the Mozilla browser in Chinook and Fennec differ most: the first uses an own UI providing -as for today- much better performance that XUL, a component that seems like needing more work before being really fit in mobile devices. Are we going to keep this difference in the future? Time we tell. Both teams have a lot of work to do anyway. But in fact the best part of this Mozilla browsers comparison is not the numbers competition part but the human collaboration part. The Mozilla and Nokia developers are collaborating and both projects are in sync. The current development of the Mozilla browser for Diablo+1 is based directly on the Gecko trunk and we are discussing ways of deepening the collaboration, also at a community level. Imagine the wide community of Firefox add-on developers targeting the maemo platform - that would be fun. We are even having some common exercises of exploration, both sides learning a lot i.e. Qt support - http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/05/06/well-isnt-that-qt/ Conclusion: We are as happy as you seeing the performance progress done by the Fennec project. We feel honored by them targeting our platform in the first place. Nokia is doing the right thing with the Mozilla development. Lots of potential for collaboration and cool stuff. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- Jonathan Greene +1.914.750.8740 AIM / iChat - atmasphere gtalk / jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype / Gizmo - JonathanGreene blogs - http://www.atmasphere.net/wp / http://www.maemoapps.com ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
I have a feeling that my 915 subscriptions have something to do with the load issues. ;) On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Aniello Del Sorbo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's weird, MicroB opens my Google Reader page with no issue at all, and is actually quite fast. -- anidel On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Jonathan Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love the Fennec browser though it could clearly use less memory, be more stable and launch more quickly. ;) It can actually render my Google Reader page which MicroB cannot ... I find it super responsive and hope we see it packaged in a future release. What I understood from the original Ars piece on the topic was that they are pretty close relatives, but that Fennec benefits from a later code base which seems to really make quite the difference. For every day use though I am running MicroB as it is far more reliable at the moment. JG On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, ext John Holmblad wrote: All, for those who have not already seen the article whose url is: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080409-first-look-mozilla-fennec-targets-handheld-browser-market.html It provides a comparison of the performance of Microb versus Fennec on the N810. Fennec shows a ~6x speed improvement for javascript. Yes, the numbers of these automated tests are right. However, users having used both browsers will probably agree that in terms of real user experience as for today both are pretty similar, and even the Nokia version is performing better in real use conditions. I'm talking about my own experience and comments I've heard. What is your opinion? I'm sure both Nokia and Mozilla developers are interested to know. Is someone lying? Not at all. It's just a matter of looking at the details. The current MicroB engine was developed one year ago by Nokia starting with a pre-alpha of the latest Gecko engine, the freshest code available by then. The release under development done last Summer put a Mozilla based browser at a level where nobody could before (including the own Mozilla guys, who were happily surprised btw). Now Fennec is shipping a most recent Gecko and of course putting both one by side you get nowadays much better performance at engine level. How much MicroB's open source code helped on that, I don't know but I guess it saved them some work. But users don't deal with engines alone, you have the UI in between and this is where the Mozilla browser in Chinook and Fennec differ most: the first uses an own UI providing -as for today- much better performance that XUL, a component that seems like needing more work before being really fit in mobile devices. Are we going to keep this difference in the future? Time we tell. Both teams have a lot of work to do anyway. But in fact the best part of this Mozilla browsers comparison is not the numbers competition part but the human collaboration part. The Mozilla and Nokia developers are collaborating and both projects are in sync. The current development of the Mozilla browser for Diablo+1 is based directly on the Gecko trunk and we are discussing ways of deepening the collaboration, also at a community level. Imagine the wide community of Firefox add-on developers targeting the maemo platform - that would be fun. We are even having some common exercises of exploration, both sides learning a lot i.e. Qt support - http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/05/06/well-isnt-that-qt/ Conclusion: We are as happy as you seeing the performance progress done by the Fennec project. We feel honored by them targeting our platform in the first place. Nokia is doing the right thing with the Mozilla development. Lots of potential for collaboration and cool stuff. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- Jonathan Greene +1.914.750.8740 AIM / iChat - atmasphere gtalk / jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype / Gizmo - JonathanGreene blogs - http://www.atmasphere.net/wp / http://www.maemoapps.com ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- anidel -- Jonathan Greene +1.914.750.8740 AIM / iChat - atmasphere gtalk / jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype / Gizmo - JonathanGreene blogs - http://www.atmasphere.net/wp / http://www.maemoapps.com ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
Same feeling :) -- Anidel On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 5:00 PM, Jonathan Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a feeling that my 915 subscriptions have something to do with the load issues. ;) On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Aniello Del Sorbo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's weird, MicroB opens my Google Reader page with no issue at all, and is actually quite fast. -- anidel On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Jonathan Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I love the Fennec browser though it could clearly use less memory, be more stable and launch more quickly. ;) It can actually render my Google Reader page which MicroB cannot ... I find it super responsive and hope we see it packaged in a future release. What I understood from the original Ars piece on the topic was that they are pretty close relatives, but that Fennec benefits from a later code base which seems to really make quite the difference. For every day use though I am running MicroB as it is far more reliable at the moment. JG On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Quim Gil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, ext John Holmblad wrote: All, for those who have not already seen the article whose url is: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080409-first-look-mozilla-fennec-targets-handheld-browser-market.html It provides a comparison of the performance of Microb versus Fennec on the N810. Fennec shows a ~6x speed improvement for javascript. Yes, the numbers of these automated tests are right. However, users having used both browsers will probably agree that in terms of real user experience as for today both are pretty similar, and even the Nokia version is performing better in real use conditions. I'm talking about my own experience and comments I've heard. What is your opinion? I'm sure both Nokia and Mozilla developers are interested to know. Is someone lying? Not at all. It's just a matter of looking at the details. The current MicroB engine was developed one year ago by Nokia starting with a pre-alpha of the latest Gecko engine, the freshest code available by then. The release under development done last Summer put a Mozilla based browser at a level where nobody could before (including the own Mozilla guys, who were happily surprised btw). Now Fennec is shipping a most recent Gecko and of course putting both one by side you get nowadays much better performance at engine level. How much MicroB's open source code helped on that, I don't know but I guess it saved them some work. But users don't deal with engines alone, you have the UI in between and this is where the Mozilla browser in Chinook and Fennec differ most: the first uses an own UI providing -as for today- much better performance that XUL, a component that seems like needing more work before being really fit in mobile devices. Are we going to keep this difference in the future? Time we tell. Both teams have a lot of work to do anyway. But in fact the best part of this Mozilla browsers comparison is not the numbers competition part but the human collaboration part. The Mozilla and Nokia developers are collaborating and both projects are in sync. The current development of the Mozilla browser for Diablo+1 is based directly on the Gecko trunk and we are discussing ways of deepening the collaboration, also at a community level. Imagine the wide community of Firefox add-on developers targeting the maemo platform - that would be fun. We are even having some common exercises of exploration, both sides learning a lot i.e. Qt support - http://blog.vlad1.com/2008/05/06/well-isnt-that-qt/ Conclusion: We are as happy as you seeing the performance progress done by the Fennec project. We feel honored by them targeting our platform in the first place. Nokia is doing the right thing with the Mozilla development. Lots of potential for collaboration and cool stuff. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- Jonathan Greene +1.914.750.8740 AIM / iChat - atmasphere gtalk / jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype / Gizmo - JonathanGreene blogs - http://www.atmasphere.net/wp / http://www.maemoapps.com ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- anidel -- Jonathan Greene +1.914.750.8740 AIM / iChat - atmasphere gtalk / jabber - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype / Gizmo - JonathanGreene blogs - http://www.atmasphere.net/wp / http://www.maemoapps.com -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
Jonathan Greene schrieb: I love the Fennec browser though it could clearly use less memory, be more stable and launch more quickly. ;) That sounds very nice! I do want take a look... :) ...but is it possible to use the browser without a hardware keyboard? The virtual one of os2008 doesen't work, right? My first impressions are: - no field for input urls (only ctrl+t works) - no menu / not hildonized - very instable (crashes sometimes) - the .desktop-link works not correctly (using it the browser shows my the root directories of the tablet) - fennec wasn't able to load my netvibes.com-page (microb has no problem with it) It sounds as if your version runs more stable. would it be an idea to uninstall an reinstal fennec (and minefield)? Ciao Uwe signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 04:50:54PM +0200, Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: MicroB opens my Google Reader page with no issue at all, and is actually quite fast. Lucky, it doesn't work for me. Fennec is still pretty unusable for me on an n800, although i have it installed and am waiting for an updated version. Sadly, readermini.com doesn't really work anymore, either, making me far, far behind on my RSS subscriptions. K -- In Vino Veritas http://astroturfgarden.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Kevin T. Neely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 04:50:54PM +0200, Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: MicroB opens my Google Reader page with no issue at all, and is actually quite fast. Lucky, it doesn't work for me. Fennec is still pretty unusable for me on an n800, although i have it installed and am waiting for an updated version. Sadly, readermini.com doesn't really work anymore, either, making me far, far behind on my RSS subscriptions. Not sure John Tokash (ReaderMini's developer) still reads this list, but I think he's been iPhoned ... ;) I tend to use the mobile version of GR, which I don't really like, but at least it's reliable. They need to do much more than a single item, but seem to be giving the goods to Apple and I suppose Android ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Uwe Kaminski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That sounds very nice! I do want take a look... :) ...but is it possible to use the browser without a hardware keyboard? The virtual one of os2008 doesen't work, right? My first impressions are: - no field for input urls (only ctrl+t works) - no menu / not hildonized - very instable (crashes sometimes) - the .desktop-link works not correctly (using it the browser shows my the root directories of the tablet) - fennec wasn't able to load my netvibes.com-page (microb has no problem with it) It sounds as if your version runs more stable. would it be an idea to uninstall an reinstal fennec (and minefield)? Ciao Uwe Fennec is pre-alpha, so don't expect much. The engine is mostly there, but they're rebuilding the UI from scratch and haven't included the menus yet. And no, it's not at all usable on an N800 without a hardware keyboard. The stylus keyboard is completely unavailable, and the finger keyboard (press the center of the D-pad to make it pop up) doesn't let you edit what's already in the address bar - all you can do is add to it (the existing text doesn't appear in the onscreen keyboard's text box). Also, apparently the default for Fennec is to not allow any javascript or java, and any sites that require them that you visit with Fennec will no longer work in MicroB. The fact that you can't change any settings without a hardware keyboard makes that a very serious issue. I didn't notice any stability issues, but I didn't keep it very long. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 11:53:29AM -0400, Jonathan Greene wrote: I tend to use the mobile version of GR, which I don't really like, but at least it's reliable. They need to do much more than a single item, ust fired up reader on my 800 and it appears to be working, albeit slowly (might blame canola running in the background on that one). What's the mobile reader URL? Tried m.reader.google.com but that was a no-go (besides, it looks like a USENET group!) K -- In Vino Veritas http://astroturfgarden.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
RE: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
Hi, This is actually where the Mozilla version has a very distinct advantage: they plan to support plug-ins, and there will be much more functionality. The current MicroB has some serious shortcomings in that area. There are some rather basic and important settings and functionality that are missing from MicroB. Note that you are comparing Fennec's future (their plans) with MicroB's past (the version you are using today). Today Fennec has more shortcomings than our Mozilla based browser from a end user point of view and this is why makes total sense to continue releasing it. In my earlier post I said that our browser development is being done nowadays on the Gecko trunk (practically same as Fennec) and we are also willing to embrace the Firefox add-on developer community. Fennec will improve thanks to Nokia's work and the other way round, such are the wonders of open source. If you're going to call it an Internet Tablet, and claim that is its only purpose, then you'd better make sure that it can deliver fully on that promise. Sure. Deliver fully is not that simple but in relative terms, can you point someone shipping today a mobile device with a browser offering you a fuller Internet experience? From my experience with Fennec, as well as the screen shots I've seen, the UI is a non-issue: Fennec already appears hildonized out of the box, and anyway one of the main areas that Mozilla is working on is to make their browsers appear more native regardless of what OS they are installed in. Of course, but the UI layer is deeper than that. I'm not sure the developers optimizing XUL for Fennec would agree on the UI is a non-issue. Funtionality and performance in the UI layer is a serious issue for any browser development nowadays and the UI layer sitting on top of MicroB today still does a better job. May this change in the future? Sure it can, and we are following that as well, but here and now we need to keep shipping a browser for real mobile users and we don't have the luxury to wait until others have done it. But Mark, the important detail I will insist on is: we are not fighting, we are collaborating. It is our priority to be as aligned with Mozilla upstream as possible, as it is also our interest to follow and support Mozilla's success in the mobile context. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 12:48:33AM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my earlier post I said that our browser development is being done nowadays on the Gecko trunk (practically same as Fennec) and we are also willing to embrace the Firefox add-on developer community. Fennec will Will we see this use of the Gecko trunk in the next OS2008 release (the one that's coming with 810 WIMAX)? Thanks Quim for the great description of the work being done. K -- In Vino Veritas http://astroturfgarden.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Kevin T. Neely [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 12:48:33AM +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my earlier post I said that our browser development is being done nowadays on the Gecko trunk (practically same as Fennec) and we are also willing to embrace the Firefox add-on developer community. Fennec will Will we see this use of the Gecko trunk in the next OS2008 release (the one that's coming with 810 WIMAX)? In Diablo+1, as mentioned elsewhere in this mailing list ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 3:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Of course, but the UI layer is deeper than that. I'm not sure the developers optimizing XUL for Fennec would agree on the UI is a non-issue. Funtionality and performance in the UI layer is a serious issue for any browser development nowadays and the UI layer sitting on top of MicroB today still does a better job. May this change in the future? Sure it can, and we are following that as well, but here and now we need to keep shipping a browser for real mobile users and we don't have the luxury to wait until others have done it. But Mark, the important detail I will insist on is: we are not fighting, we are collaborating. It is our priority to be as aligned with Mozilla upstream as possible, as it is also our interest to follow and support Mozilla's success in the mobile context. -- Quim Gil marketing manager, open source maemo software @ Nokia I guess my main concern is that add-ons be supported so that missing functionality can be put back in by the end user. MicroB currently frustrates me because so much of the settings available in regular Firefox are absent, and it's not possible to mitigate that with add-ons. As for comparing the Internet Tablets' browsing experience with other devices, that's really not possible. No other device exists that is marked as being specifically intended for that single purpose. Other devices happen to include that functionality in addition to a bunch of stuff that the ITs *don't* do (but easily could if the software existed...). Like I said, if you're going to put Internet in the name, then at least that set of functions should be very broadly supported. There's no GUI ftp or telnet (secure or otherwise), Web browsing has some firm limitations (but I will admit it could be a *lot* worse), and other Internet functionality is missing. One thing I've noticed is that there seems to be some kind of proxy thing going on when I try to go to a Web site: instead of just going directly to the site I selected, there's some sort of wysiwyg.something address that shows in the address bar. Is it attempting to show us a WAP page or something before referring the real one? Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec
All, for those who have not already seen the article whose url is: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080409-first-look-mozilla-fennec-targets-handheld-browser-market.html It provides a comparison of the performance of Microb versus Fennec on the N810. Fennec shows a ~6x speed improvement for javascript. -- Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
