Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Mark 
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

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Ryan Abel 
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: WiFi Not connecting to My Network

2008-05-09 Thread Dean Chester 
The problem that i get now is that once it has tried to connect it  
doesn't then show the WiFi network in the select connection window. I  
have to turn on offline mode then turn it back to normal mode for the  
Wifi network to show. Is there a fix out there? Because i have lost  
root access aswell now:( and xTerm.
On 8 May 2008, at 22:17, Dean Chester wrote:

> I Backed up but im still having the same problem.
> On 7 May 2008, at 23:16, Graham Cobb wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 07 May 2008 21:47:37 Dean Chester wrote:
>>> yes i think its called GPE todo.
>>
>> The GPE databases are saved if you use the Nokia backup/restore
>> program to
>> save them onto a memory card.  You can then restore them after you
>> have
>> re-flashed.
>>
>> Note: there was a GPE bug for a time which stopped the GPE databases
>> being
>> saved.  The bug was fixed some time ago but it is possible you are
>> running a
>> very old version of GPE.  If you have Xterm installed, you can copy
>> the
>> database files by hand, just in case the backup doesn't work.  Start
>> xterm
>> and copy the files using:
>>
>> cp ~/.gpe/* /media/mmc1/
>>
>> Graham
>> ___
>> maemo-users mailing list
>> maemo-users@maemo.org
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
>
> Dean Chester
>
> E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Blog: http://deanchester.com/blog
>
>
>
> ___
> maemo-users mailing list
> maemo-users@maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users

Dean Chester

E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://deanchester.com/blog



___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Kevin T. Neely 
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

2008-05-09 Thread quim.gil 

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

2008-05-09 Thread Kevin T. Neely 
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

2008-05-09 Thread Mark 
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: sporadic reset of hildon desktop

2008-05-09 Thread Eero Tamminen 
Hi,

ext Uwe Kaminski wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>  
> Peter Flynn schrieb:
>>> I have been able to reproduce this crash consistently with Pidgin
>>> from downloads.maemo.org on OS2008 (N810).
>> Unfortunately I don't use Pidgin, so it's not responsible for my
> restarts. my
>> desktop has the search box, RSS reader, FM radio, clock, and (until
> yesterday)
>> OMweather (now replaced by Internet radio). I also usually run GPE Calendar
>> and leave it running.
> I don't use pidgin too and the problem happens. It also doesen't matter
> whether zero, one or more home applets are in use. But since yesterday
> ther seems to be no laonger a problem. Yesterday I upgraded to the
> latest version of the "personal menu" plugin. Maybe this has fixed the
> problem?

Home, statusbar and tasknavigator are all in the same process to save
memory (>1MB per UI process).  If any of their plugins have stability
issues, it brings down the whole desktop (which then restarts without
Home plugins[1]).

If the problem happens without any home plugins enabled, maybe you've
installed some bad Statusbar plugin?


- Eero

[1] So far we've had problems mainly with Home plugins as they are
 more complex than e.g. Statusbar plugins.
___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Jonathan Greene 
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

2008-05-09 Thread Kevin T. Neely 
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: Change Search Applets Search Engine

2008-05-09 Thread Michael Thompson 
2008/5/8 Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> I'd prefer NOT to use the evil empires search engine which shows up in
> th4e search applet on the desktop, and change it to one of 2 or 3 others.
>
> Is

there a way to do this?


http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-users/2008-April/010020.html
___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Uwe Kaminski 
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

2008-05-09 Thread Aniello Del Sorbo 
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-user

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Jonathan Greene 
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
___
ma

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Aniello Del Sorbo 
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

2008-05-09 Thread Jonathan Greene 
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

2008-05-09 Thread Mark 
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: sporadic reset of hildon desktop

2008-05-09 Thread Uwe Kaminski 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
 
Peter Flynn schrieb:
>> I have been able to reproduce this crash consistently with Pidgin
>> from downloads.maemo.org on OS2008 (N810).
>
> Unfortunately I don't use Pidgin, so it's not responsible for my
restarts. my
> desktop has the search box, RSS reader, FM radio, clock, and (until
yesterday)
> OMweather (now replaced by Internet radio). I also usually run GPE Calendar
> and leave it running.
I don't use pidgin too and the problem happens. It also doesen't matter
whether zero, one or more home applets are in use. But since yesterday
ther seems to be no laonger a problem. Yesterday I upgraded to the
latest version of the "personal menu" plugin. Maybe this has fixed the
problem?

Ciao Uwe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: strato
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
iD8DBQFIJDCWYWGEfjs1Jf0RAj7NAJ9kwIuUyuZSTahMM2njfuae1bC3xACgxO6u
obkiii80t0iwsu8v0qgYlxY=
=oQlF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users

Re: Microb Versus Mozilla Fennec

2008-05-09 Thread Quim Gil 
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: sporadic reset of hildon desktop

2008-05-09 Thread Peter Flynn 
On Thu, 8 May 2008 18:28:14 -0700, Dylan McCall wrote
> Sorry Peter, I sent this straight to you the first time. Always do
> that with my first posts :/

Always a problem with discussion lists set up as announcement lists.

> I have been able to reproduce this crash consistently with Pidgin 
> from downloads.maemo.org on OS2008 (N810). 

Unfortunately I don't use Pidgin, so it's not responsible for my restarts. my
desktop has the search box, RSS reader, FM radio, clock, and (until yesterday)
OMweather (now replaced by Internet radio). I also usually run GPE Calendar
and leave it running.

///Peter

___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users

Re: omweather recently broken?

2008-05-09 Thread Yonathan Dossow 
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 20:48 -0400, Jeffrey Mark Siskind wrote:
> I'm running OS2008 on an N810. I have omweather installed. It was working fine
> until just the past day or so. Now the icons are all question marks in
> circles and the temperatures are all N/A. I haven't installed anything
> recently or changed any settings. I get an error "Wrong station code or ZIP
> code!!!". I have it set to show West Lafayette IN, Indianapolis, and Chicago.
> All three exhibit this same problem. Does anybody else have this problem? Any
> idea on how to fix it?

i recently received the following mail related to my registration with
the XML weather.com feed:

"[...]
Your registered application may or may not currently be in compliance
with the terms of our agreement (please refer to the developer SDK
containing the license agreement – see link below). We are in the
process of updating the Service to programmatically validate certain
licensing conditions. Beginning May 6, 2008, if your application is not
in compliance with these terms, the Service will no longer return data
to your application. 
[... a lot of terms/restricctions ...]"

maybe this bug is related to a violation of terms.

-- 
Yonathan H. Dossow Acun~a  http://kronin.bla.cl
Estudiante Ingenieria Civil Informatica
Unidad de Servicios de Computacion e Internet  Fono: +56 32 2654367
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria  Valparaiso, Chile


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users