ok has anyone heard of dillo? dillo is completly written in C and is super fast and very compatible for most websites and is constantly being worked on and improved......and wrighting some MUI GUI for it would not be that difficult (i would imagine) the browser code itself is EXTREMELY portable....what do you think?

so when are you starting the port?

as soon as i get my peg hehe (end of summerish) (summer job money goes there)....it should compile out of the box except the gui

I moved the topic to MorphBounties, because it seems to make more sense here. Two things I noted from their webpage, CSS support is in kind of a beta stage, and the donation box is open.

I'm betting this project, like so many others, would probably need a Peg donated for the original authors to even attempt support.

Forget about dillo.

All of the Amiga browsers (Aweb, Ibrowse and Voyager)
are currently more powerful than dillo!

Voyager, Ibrowse and Aweb are not too bad as browsers.
There are not as advanced as IE,Mozilla, Konqueror and Opera though but they are as powerfull as the native browsers on RiscOS (Oregano) , QNX and BeOS (Voyager, Netpositive)

The future of Amiga browsing doesn't look to bad actually.
The roadmap for Ibrowse 3.0 looks very nice.
Ibrowse 3.0 will have many features which will make browsing very nice again.
There are people working in the Amizilla port.
Mozilla is a very good browser and a port for the Amiga will solve all web problems.
The Aweb team is continuesly enhancing the old Aweb version.
Its called Aweb lite now. And a beta of Aweb 3.5 lite is available for download since a few days. Its quite nice actually.
(BTW: I wonder why there was no news line on this site reporting about the new Aweb version?)

The Aweb team plans to port the KHTML engine to Amiga
This project is called Aweb 4.0. The Khtml engine is used by Konqueror and MAC Safari. The resulting browser should be comparable to Mozilla featurewise but maybe is bit slimmer and faster.

I don't know about the plans for Voyager.
But I think that the future of Amiga browsing looks very promising


Cheers
Gunnar

dillo is mind nummingly fast though and super small. and wil Ibrowse 3.0 ever be released?
arnt they going to do a 2.4 before it....i was under the impression 3.0 was kinda a rewrite and would only suport PPC no more 68k and is way far off...if i am wrong please correct me

:edit: QNX voyager browser is better than IE hands down better

[ Edited by poundsmack on 2004/7/3 0:46 ]

Hi Targhan,

>I'm betting this project, like so many others, would probably >need a Peg donated for the original authors to even attempt >support.

If you want to support a browser team
then I would recommand to support the Aweb guys!


1st) Aweb is open source.
(Anybody can help coding)

2nd) The Aweb team is very friendly
and its listening to wishes, ideas of other people.

3rd) Andy Broad, the main programmer of the Aweb team has only a Amiga 1200 to code. If you have a Pegasos to give away- give it to Andy. It will surely help him to fater improve Aweb and it would help a lot to get a native MOS port of Aweb. ;)


Cheers
Gunnar



[ Edited by BigGun on 2004/7/3 8:49 ]

they dont have a peg?! AWeb is the browser for amiga that i think should be most suported as well...i personaly think it would be worth giving the mozila bounty to if the can get there 4.0 browser based on KHTML out i think that would be awsome....by they way why dont they have a peg?

1. AWeb is horrible on MorphOS, I don't know what illegal, wrong, or messed up stuff it's doing, but
it certainly doesn't work right here.

2. I don't have any give aways. If I did, I would have long since donated one.

3. I helped as an installer writer for the aweb team for a while (do they still need me?)

4. The AWeb update wasn't posted here because someone was working on MorphZone and PPCZone at the
time (and still is). Maybe some happy person will find the submit news button

Hi poundsmack.

>dillo is mind nummingly fast though and super small

Actually Dillo's executable is 400 KB.
This might be small compared to IE
but its fat compared to Amiga browser.

Please mind that:

- Dillo does NOT support javascript
- Dillo does not even support background images
- Dillo does not support iframes
it does not even support normal frames

Dillo is a nice project but its years
behind Voyage,Ibrowse and Aweb.

My recommandation is if you want to support an Opensource
Amiga browser than help the Aweb team.
Aweb currently has features which Dillo might have in a few years.

Cheers
Gunnar

@Poundsmack.

>AWeb is the browser for amiga that i think should be most suported as well

Full ACK!


>by they way why dont they have a peg?

No money?
Blinded by red fud?
I think Andy has very limited funds and some people told him
he should save his money and wait until the *wonderful*
AmigaOne/AOS4 is out and working. (ha!)

The Aweb crew has nothing against MOS.
I think they just have never seen a Peg live.


@Targhan,

What is the problem with Aweb on your machine?
I use Aweb 3.5 every day. Its not perfect but its quite nice.
It renders quite a few sites better than V or Ibrowse.



Cheers
Gunnar

[ Edited by BigGun on 2004/7/3 9:08 ]

[ Edited by BigGun on 2004/7/3 9:11 ]

Quote:

Don't count on it and it would be pretty nice to not associate KHTML with the AWEB project that much. A little history just for the sake to clear up some facts here.

When GENESI announced a possible port of Atlantis to MorphOS around one year ago on ANN.lu the person HMK from AWEB team responded to that Thread informing me that they might be interested in a KHTML port was well. I then immediately replied to him because I had the idea to work together with these people to not duplicate work.

HMK replied to me letting me know that they initially planned to use GECKO for AWEB but after some deeper conversation we came to the conclusion that KHTML would be a big win. I then subscribed to the AWEB developers mailinglist and started conversation with the people there. After a short time GLENN and I became the responsibles for the KHTML port because we talked about that all the time (we were even mentioned on their Developers list page). But after some months we figured out that we had different problems there. While GLENN had no time working on KHTML, I on the otherhand had no PEG that time to work on something or make myself confortable with the system called MorphOS and Pegasos. The result was that I left the AWEB project (specially the KHTML part). There was also some communication problem (my opinion) because HMK made all types of announcements about KHTML everywhere like it's the idea of the AWEB team and that they were heavily working on it while on the otherhand there wasn't even one line of KHTML code being contributed, not even a repository has been created, not even further developers were found, well basicly nothing has been done except some conversation (see the Mailinglist archives around one year ago - I doubt anything has changed after that).

There are still plans of a possible port of KHTML from my side (which also depends on the complexity and the possibility e.g. good C++ supporting compiler on MorphOS, time and many more). But something I dislike is having the KHTML stuff associated exclusively to AWEB. Exactly this was another reason for me to leave AWEB to because HMK was seeding wrong expectations and missinformation into peoples head which is not the way to go.

Without developers, without driving forces nothing will ever happen. Whenever I hear someone saying KHTML and AWEB in one sentence then I ask myself 'how ?' the only two people seriously interested in actually 'doing' the work was GLENN and I and we both had other stuff to do and now that I don't participate with them anymore the whole idea of KHTML and AWEB is nothing else than unconfirmed theory.

[ Edited by oGALAXYo on 2004/7/3 11:47 ]

@oGalaxyo

Thank you for the information.

As some other projects AWeb suffers from low man power.
Being opensource theoretially many people could help working on Aweb but unfortunately the only person constantly working on it is Andy.

I think the small Aweb crew made some great progress so far.
1) The port of the original Aweb source to ggc is finished.
2) Since a few month Andy is fixing one bug after the other.
AWeb made some great progress lately.

I think the current strategy to improve the original Aweb step by step is a good idea. This way even only one parttime programmer can produce good results in time.

Of course with a few more helping coders
AWeb would evolve/improve much much faster.

And with the help of some dedicated people KHTML
could be ported to Amiga nicely.

You mentioned Henrik.
Well he is coordinating the bugzilla, website etc.
He isn't really programming. I can totally understand why he announce the plan of the Aweb crew to port KHTML to Amiga.

Aweb could really need one or two more dedicated progammers to help. So publicity is good. Maybe there are still some skillful coders around who would have time to help?


Cheers
Gunnar

Quote:

Thanks but I have to reject here. I work on something I believe in and it's not called Aweb. My project is Atlantis which I believe in and which I have started porting (well it's more a recode) to MorphOS. Anyways, I do whish good luck with further development on Aweb.

From my experience during my Amithlon-days I can say this:

AWeb is stable, but it is also 100% crap (sorry, but thats how it is), completly unusable for browsing anything but Amiga-related sites, a complete pain for browsing Amiga-related sites.

IBrowse (2.2 at that time) is much nicer and more complete, but also faaaaaar to crash-haapy to be even considered for everyday use.

Voyager-68k, dunno, never got that one to work

Reason Numero-Uno why I allmost allways ended up booting Linux/Windows

Now with the Peg:
Had AWeb (Opensource) installed once on MOS1.2, still a pain in the .... and the need for ReAction/ClassAct makes it an absolute no-go-area.

Never bothered to try IBrowse2.3, since I feel that would be a deadend for us anyways.

VoyagerPPC seems to be stable enough, and since I use the Linux-PC for normal browsing it does suffice.

A new browser should:
use MUI (no way I'm gonna install YAGTK)
be based on an OS-source-engine (KHTML/gecko), cos I don't see how it could ever become useable and more important stay useable if it were based on a costum engine.

[ Edited by Kronos on 2004/7/3 15:10 ]

Hey Kronos you should give IBrowse 2.3 a try it is very stable, i had no crash for month, and you can browse meny Sites without pain in your .... But IBrowse is still missing some importent things like CSS, better JavaScript, Flashsupport and more.

I dont know what magic you have found to keep Ibrowse 2.3 from crashing, but it does it all the time for me. All I dod was extract the archive and run it from the folder. So whats the deal? I'm lucky if I can look at two pages in before it locks up.

[ Edited by Acill on 2004/7/3 6:57 ]

@oGLAXAXYo,

Its very nice to hear that you work on Atlantis.
I hope that you will succed to finish this port soon.
If you get this browser (based on the GTKHTML)
running on MOS it will surely kick ass.

Atlantis, Mplayer, AmiNetradio, Simplemail
will add to MOS 99% of the features what people need all day.

I'm now quite curious...
How is your port/recode progressing?
Can you already guess when a demo/beta version could be released?

Keep up the good work!
Cheers

Gunnar

IBrowse comes with some of it's own MUI classes that must be deleted, since native MorphOS versions already exist.

Ibrowse is 100% stable once you have it setup correctly on MorphOS 1.4.2. Ask on the #morphos channel for help in setting it up.

I have just installed it and thats all, had never problems with IB2.3 and i had no problems with MUI Classes!

@Targhan & Kronos

You should really try to install and use AWeb 3.5 beta. Andy Broad has done a really good job, and the browser is now very compatible with Amiga-related sites (it works with MorphZone, while the 3.4 APL version had many issues) and also with non-Amiga sites (of course with all the well-known limitations that affect even IBrowse and Voyager).

We should find a way to help Andy Broad. He is a good programmer and deserves attention and support.

Regards

@doc

unfortunately, I'm not rich, so I offered support where I could, as an installer-writer. since I wasn't emailed prior to the new release, I am supposing that they didn't need the installer rewritten. I do try to support things when I can, but I have had nothing but problems with aweb on morphos....

* sigh

Yet another port post...

Let me ask you please...

Of all the posts you have about ports name ONE that has been ported...

@Player

Same here.. IB 2.3 is VERY stable for me.. but JS sux :)

magnetic

hmmm


Aweb 3.5 seems nice but how fast is it? Maybe the programmers can join efforts with Galaxy?



[ Edited by magnetic on 2004/7/3 14:57 ]

@ Targhan

If you have problems with AWeb please file a bugreport so that the developers have a chance to fix the problems.

AWeb runs very good on my place.
There is just one possible reason for stability problems which I can thing of: Of Aweb 3.4 exist actually three different versions
Aweb 3.4 68k (sasc C), Aweb 3.4 APL 68k (gcc) and Aweb 3.4 APL PPC.
The included AWEb libraries of the 68k and the PPC version are NOT compatible. So if you mix the files of an 68k install and a PPC install than you get an unstable AWeb version.


cheers
Gunnar