Hello Matt, On 2004-07-13, you wrote:
>> No you had buttons with similar functionality. Sorry but I like the look >> of tabs. Speaking of support, there are more things included with >> support than removing a buggy function. > Tabs (MUI register objects) are inefficient. When you create them, they > keep around the entire state (and bitmaps etc.) of the objects inside > them. So instead of 20 webpages that you can garbage collect, clean up, > free extraneous memory on etc., you end up with 20 webpages that you > can't do anything except close. It also means that on selecting, for > example "open page in new panel" with the panel loading in the > background, it will take up as much memory and resources as if you were > reading it. > It's not exactly 100% friendly on system resources. Thanks for the explanation. I still like the look of the tabs that IBrowse has (and every major browser (IE, Mozilla, Opera)) but I think that it's a good idea if the browser can make a function in a better way. >> > Useless. They have native GIF, JPEG and PNG decoders anyway which >> > are much faster. What's the point of datatypes than to work around >> > the fact that IBrowse isn't PowerPC native yet? >> >> It had it before MOS was available so it's not the reason for why >> datatypes are supported. You seem to miss the point here. If you use the >> four supported imagetypes and visit a webbsite with a type not supported >> directly a datatype will be used instead if available. That means that >> BMP or whatever there is (IFF) will work. > If there are websites using BMP or IFF then they are not going to display > on anything except Windows and Amiga browser respectively. BMP, sure, > that may be common enough on some Geocities pages, but IFF? TIFF? Sun > Raster? PCX? None are common supported web formats. What's the point of > using datatypes when they are entirely uncommon formats? It's clever and *if* it happens it will work. Sure it isn't common, I know that, but some I-don't-know-what-a-computer-is person might put a picture on the web using a non-standard format and if someone does that it will work. >> >> priority settings for loading background/pictures/picturesize >> >> > (which are so advanced, no user could possibly improve on the >> > defaults..) >> >> You're right. Stupid Stefan to implement that ;-) . > It's not stupid, it's easy to implement, but the actual use to users > is precisely zero functionality or improvement in responsiveness or > speed - changing priorities is something only the browser can do > effectively, if it even has that knowledge of what other components > are doing at any time to make an effective change, and any benefits > are 900% pyschosomatic to the user. If you change the image decoder > priorities up, you will lose responsivity on the rest of the browser, > if you change image decoder priorities down, they will lag behind > the main page process something crazy after a while. > There's scant few reasons to change priorities for ANYTHING to anything > other than priority 0 or priority -1. Might be true. I've played around with the settings in IBrowse and I've ended up with having them at 0. Anyway they are there for a reason and I'm sure that someone of the IBrowse-developers can explain why. I'm even sure that I've read the reason but I can't remember years of messages. >> >> amissl wich is newer than SSL for Voyager >> >> > Which makes no difference whatsoever. There have been no significant >> > improvements in SSL technology since VSSL was last released. No >> > new ciphers, no faster algorithms, no new protocols and handshakes.. >> >> I've got several "the date has expired..." messages lately in Voyager >> but not in IBrowse......... > Then you should upgrade your certificates - they're in a directory in > the Voyager folder called "Certificates", if I remember correctly. The > newer root certs are available in the OpenSSL archives, as far as I know > they are drop-in replacements. > You don't need a new recompile or a newer OpenSSL to use them. Just new > root/signing authority certificates. I've moved the certificate-files over from AmiSSL to the certificates-directory but it didn't change a thing. >> > AWeb team know this, that's why they picked KHTML for their next >> > big version. I will gladly try it out in 3 years when they complete >> > the first alpha-alpha-buggy versions. >> >> You really like competition, don't you? ;-) .... They've done a good job >> on AWeb. It was completely new sourcecode to them, something that you >> didn't need to bother with. Question is why Voyager hasn't been updated >> in 2 years. That is a bigger questionmark. > Why is there a question? This has been explained so many times at such > great lengths. Zapek is busy. I'm busy. Olli is busy. Well, so has the reason for why AWeb is being delayed. And IBrowse too for that matter. > Just like Stefan Buerstrom was busy for 2 years and you were stuck with > broken IBrowse that died whenever there was an <EMBED> tag. Yes I know that. So why are you picking on AWeb? I can understand why. Why can't you? > It's no SECRET. We have things to do that don't involve Voyager 24/7 - > Olli has a job, Zapek has been concentrating on Ambient, and I seem to > pick up the slack on every project known to man besides Voyager, along > with whatever duties I have to perform :) No it isn't. But development has stalled and every project seems to have the same problem for obvious reasons. But why do you pick on AWeb being "behind" your browser. It's only logical. Besides, the development of AWeb was made by one guy and he was the first to give the Amiga javascript-support. Does that tell you something? Does it mean that he was actually ahead of you *and* IBrowse? Yes that is very much so. Still I didn't complain on Voyager nor IBrowse at that time. >> > So if you don't like the progress of Voyager, you can >> > go away and use IBrowse, and quit this mailing list. >> >> I am using IBrowse. I use AWeb some times too. And belive it or not >> Voyager is installed and it happens that I launch that one too. But like >> I said before you are free to kick me out of the list if it makes you >> feal better or something. I really don't care. > I won't kick you off. But if you really don't care, you can leave > yourself. If all that there is room for in your head is criticism > of Voyager.. don't speak at all. Offcourse I care about Voyager. The thing is that if you won't support AOS nomore I see little point of me being here since I'm not going down the MOS-road at this point and Zapek made it very clear to me that be there or be.... well you know. I can't afford to support both systems and I've made my choice so I'll stick with it. I do criticise Voyager because I want some things "fixed". >> > Can't you just be grateful you have developers at all at a >> > time like this? If you are so enamoured with IBrowse, why >> > do you bother hanging around on here at all? Is it fun for >> > you to aggrevate developers? >> >> Offcourse I am. I just don't like babies who pic on other developers. >> I've heard recently complains about Hyperion, Amiga Inc on this list and >> now you complained about AWeb, making fun of them. It is childish > The comments about AWeb, however, are entirely technically accurate. It's > not "new source code" to anyone since it's been around for 3 years now, > and we all knew from the basic implementation of it that it was so far > behind Voyager that it was a joke. The competitor is and always was > IBrowse, but even that isn't much better - now you had to sit around and > wait for IBrowse to be updated and you were SURPRISINGLY silent on the > IBrowse list for that time. Now that Voyager slows down a bit, you whine > every damned day. Why the discrepency? It's new for those who who just jumped on the project. The guy that was first to look at the sourcecode got most experience with it. So 3 years isn't for everyone of the developers. I've been using/trying IBrowse and Voyager since v1.0 of both and at that time IBrowse was the better one and it has been like that ever since. At one time AWeb got intresting because suddenly it got support for frames, shortly after IBrowse and Voyager. Then it suddenly got support for Javascript *before* IBrowse and Voyager and I thought that it was great. Not many besides me seems to have seen that. I remember talking to a guy who used IBrowse and Voyager. He said that he hoped that IB/V would get javascript-support soon and I told him that AWeb allready got support for it. He was very much supriced and couldn't belive me untill he'd checked it out for himself. Still I wasn't whining or moaning about IB/V. In fact I never have. >> The last time I asked for AOS 4 support a "no" would have done it or >> even better "no, we are only developing for MOS at the moment". But >> instead I got a long explanation about how bad certain people are (guess >> who and what company). It is difficult to see why this info would've >> been necessary. > You got a "no" to start with. Then someone WHINED about WHY it was a > "no". Then you got the explanation. David is not known to be anything > more than terse in his dealings with people, and you have just put 1000 > words into his mouth from the first instance. I wondered because I was very excited of finaly getting AOS 4. I had no idea that he was into MOS. Besides I don't know much about him since he's been quite here untill that question. He might be loud on other MLs that I don't got access to but that is something that I wouldn't know. >> Yes I like IBrowse and AWeb. I paid for Voyager however because I wanted >> to help in some way, not because I liked Voyager very much. > Ah, a pity registration. I'm sure we're all grateful for the pity, but > it does not give you the right to run around on this list and spend > mail after mail after mail constantly denegrating everything to do with > the browser. No it wasn't. It was a support payment. I've done lots of those, sometimes because of the project being great, sometimes only for support. I've allways had faith in Voyager and I've hoped that it would improve but it haven't. It's allways felt like a half-hearted attempt. AmIRC on the other hand is great and your best program IMHO. > Do you do this for the AWeb guys since they took 2 years to produce a new > release and add some 5-minute features? Did you do this for Stefan B. > when he took years out from the development of IBrowse and didn't even > have a public bugtracker to show for it? NO. You damn well didn't. Why do > we get treated differently? I didn't do it for AWeb because I knew the reason and it is only logical that it will take time to set up a new team, orgainise things, understand the code and so on. But it was frustrating, yes. When it came to IBrowse it was frustrating as well, but I understood that one too. When it comes to Voyager the fealing was that you're all busy, wich you allready said. The reason is that you're attitude is like this: "you got a problem? Well fix it because it's your fault". I asked you (yes you Matt) about a little problem that I got years ago. It was about me not being able to send a mail from Voyagers built-in mail-program. I could send a mail with IBrowse, AWeb, YAM. Your answer was that there's nothing wrong with Voyager. The discussion ended up with you sending me an e-mail personaly telling me that there's nothing wrong with Voyager. You knew better than me. A simple question turned into something ugly. Since then the attitude has been pretty much the same, Voyager works, the code is great (statement from Voyagers code compared to AWeb on this ML), you stupid user and so on. What kind of support is that? You did proof that you can be a good support with the techical explanation about the tabs. That's the best thing that you ever wrote on this ML (or any that I'm on). If you look at Oliver (IBrowse ML wich you're on) he writes these kind of things every now and then. This doesn't make IBrowse a better browser technicaly but everything counts you know. If Voyager was the best browser there is and IBrowse was something much less I'd still stick with IBrowse because of the nice treadment. > Is it because we're not blind Amiga fanboys who are eager to get anything > with a red-and-white sticker on it? Is it because we just don't have time > for you these days because we are busy earning money or doing good things > for orphans and sick children? I don't care about that MOS/AOS war that some people enjoy having. And I accept that you've got other things to do just like I accepted that Stefan got tired of coding on IBrowse. We're only humans and I understood that looong time ago. > Go and buy a PC and use Mozilla. If you want a good browser that you > can't whine about, you will be sorely disappointed even with that, but at > least you'll be whining well out of earshot of us. I don't need to I can boot into Linux if I want to use Mozilla. I'm not whining I'm trying to make you hear and understand the problem. If you don't understand what I write everything that I write will sound like whining to you. If I say that scrolling is slow on my A4000D with a Mediator and a Voodoo you better believe it. I'm not whining, I'm telling you my experience. If I'm saying that I can't send a mail with Voyager, same thing. I could however send a mail with Microdot II wich could've given you a hint but we never got that far..... >> I do however speak my mind every now and then. And if you like to pic on >> people you should be able to handle the same treatment yourself. It's >> only plain logic. > Ah, so now when I "pick" on IBrowse and AWeb it is unacceptable, and that > I should only get that in return - yet when I "speak my mind" in response > to your blatant whinging criticism of Voyager, you are agast and cannot > possibly understand why I speak like that. I'm not aiming on giving anything to you in return but you get upset over little in compare to what you give. Yes I speak my mind, like it or not. I do the same everywhere, this ML isn't exclusive ;-) . My criticism is ment to make you improve Voyager. But I've seen now that it doesn't work. You do as you wish and everyone else can f*** off. That's a language that everyone understands, so let me ask you, are there any users left except for those who bought a Pegasos? Because if you don't change your attitude there won't be many left to yell to. I can put up with much but you're really pushing it, and have been for several years. This is history, nothing new. > I'll give you a hint; if you criticise Voyager here, and say that it > needs to "catch up" to AWeb, then you deserve to get the full technical > response as to why there is no catching up to be done. If you are not > happy with the fact that Voyager matches AWeb and IBrowse or even > surpasses it in some ways, then you know where to go. I haven't said that it needs to "catch up" to AWeb. That's a plain lie and I wonder how on earth you can say something like that. And no I don't think that Voyager matches AWeb nor IBrowse but since you don't care about what I think what's the point in discussing it? Just do what you're usually doing, write it in the way that you like, don't listen and we'll see where it ends. Regards Jörgen Danielsson
