On 4 Feb 2011 Brian Jordan wrote:
> One thing occurs to me; you are using r11515 which is a development build
> of Netsurf which has with it a warning "Notice: At any given time these
> builds may be unstable or have verbose logging enabled which could
> compromise performance of the browser", ha
On 4 Feb 2011 Steve Fryatt wrote:
> Also, define "any browser" compatible. These days, I'd take that to mean
> lots of CSS and not Fresco-friendly; YMMV.
What I mean is that they will format as intended on any browser (well
maybe not early versions of mosaic) even if it doesn't support CSS or
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 01:29:02PM +, Richard Porter wrote:
> On 4 Feb 2011 Rob Kendrick wrote:
>
> > As I said, you know where the sources are if you think you know better.
>
> Point noted but I think the 'dancing around' is more of a design
> problem.
The problem is not as simple as you
On 4 Feb 2011 Rob Kendrick wrote:
> As I said, you know where the sources are if you think you know better.
Point noted but I think the 'dancing around' is more of a design
problem.
--
Richard Porterhttp://www.minijem.plus.com/
mai
On 4 Feb 2011 David J. Ruck wrote:
> On 04/02/2011 11:42, Richard Porter wrote:
>> The NetSurf web site says:
>>
>> "Efficiency lies at the heart of the NetSurf engine, allowing it to
>> outwit the heavyweights of the web browser world. The NetSurf team
>> continue to squeeze more speed out of the
On 4 Feb, Richard Porter wrote in message
<26fe40a051.r...@user.minijem.plus.com>:
> On 4 Feb 2011 Rob Kendrick wrote:
>
> > Also, NetSurf implements *FAR MORE* of HTML and CSS than either Fresco
> > or Oregano. The amount of work it is doing is an order of magnatude
> > greater.
>
> The t
In article <66463fa051.r...@user.minijem.plus.com>,
Richard Porter wrote:
> The NetSurf web site says:
> "Efficiency lies at the heart of the NetSurf engine, allowing it to
> outwit the heavyweights of the web browser world. The NetSurf team
> continue to squeeze more speed out of their code
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 12:00:49PM +, Richard Porter wrote:
>
> > Also, NetSurf implements *FAR MORE* of HTML and CSS than either Fresco
> > or Oregano. The amount of work it is doing is an order of magnatude
> > greater.
>
> The test pages were 'any browser' compatible so Netsurf didn't hav
On 4 Feb 2011 Rob Kendrick wrote:
>> Now obviously there's a big advantage in coding in assembler for a
>> specific processor family rather than using C and making the code
>> portable,
> I wouldn't call it an advantage. And none of the browsers you list here
> are written in assembler; they're
On 04/02/2011 11:42, Richard Porter wrote:
The NetSurf web site says:
"Efficiency lies at the heart of the NetSurf engine, allowing it to
outwit the heavyweights of the web browser world. The NetSurf team
continue to squeeze more speed out of their code."
I've been doing one or two comparisons
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 11:42:03AM +, Richard Porter wrote:
> The NetSurf web site says:
>
> "Efficiency lies at the heart of the NetSurf engine, allowing it to
> outwit the heavyweights of the web browser world. The NetSurf team
> continue to squeeze more speed out of their code."
>
> I've
The NetSurf web site says:
"Efficiency lies at the heart of the NetSurf engine, allowing it to
outwit the heavyweights of the web browser world. The NetSurf team
continue to squeeze more speed out of their code."
I've been doing one or two comparisons on a 300MHz Kinetic RiscPC
running OS 6.16
12 matches
Mail list logo