Web browser offerings compared - RISC OS News, Software and Information

Web browser offerings compared

Published: 17th Mar 2005, 14:02:27GMT Source: drobe.co.uk
By Chris Williams

Page 1 of 1

Not at all like pick'n'mix

In order to get an overview of the recent web browser news, we've compiled a list of the main advantages and disadvantages for each of the touted applications. The comparisons were drawn up from unofficial features lists and discussions with the developers involved, and should hopefully offer a balanced view and answer a few frequently asked questions. We'll welcome any corrections or updates, but please be aware that what might not be an advantage or disadvantage to you, may very well be an important advantage or grave disadvantage for others.

Firefox port
Announced by Drobe.co.uk writer Peter Naulls, the Firefox port will be a RISC OS version of the popular Mozilla spin-off. Peter has also today published an FAQ (that's frequently anticipated questions) on his website.
Advantages

Supports HTML4, XHTML1, CSS1, CSS2 and some of CSS3, DOM1, DOM2 and some of DOM3, SSL, cookies, various XML technologies and more, allowing the browser into over 90% of the Internet's websites
Full Javascript support
Tabbed browsing, although Peter commented that, "I don't really consider tabbed browsing an advantage on RISC OS - the right click mechanism is much more flexible."
Pop-up ad and image blocking
Themes and extensions
Search as you type
Open source software, in that any one can help contribute to the application. This also makes the Firefox port completely free for download, although you're asked to pledge cash
Changes to the mainstream Firefox client, which being extremely popular is tested and updated by its large userbase, can be made available to RISC OS users
Developing the port will also open up further ports of other X11 based software, such as spreadsheets and other productivity applications

Disadvantages

Firefox, being an offspring of the hefty Mozilla client, will likely require a fast computer for reasonable use, ideally requiring an XScale processor and at least 64M of free RAM - although the exact system requirements aren't known yet, and Peter has declined to comment further until he's confirmed how fast the browser runs on various set ups
User interface will not be style guide compliant, that is, it won't look like a RISC OS application, until further work is done on the RISC OS port of the GTK2 library
Will not initially support RISC OS web browser plugins, which rules out Flash and Java support from RISC OS plugins for the time being

Oregano 3
Proposed by OreganoUK, Oregano 3 would be a RISC OS version of Oregan's Media Browser, as employed by Sony in their Playstation 2 consoles. OreganoUK is currently gauging interest in such a product, although details are sketchy. Some recent screenshots can be found here.
Advantages

Supports most of HTML4, DOM2 and some of DOM3, CSS1 and CSS2 plus TV browser CSS extensions, DHTML, cookies and SSL, allowing it into the majority of the Internet's
Uses the same Javascript support library that Firefox employs, with DOM support
Macromedia Flash 5 compatible player
Pop-up ad blocking
Playback support for MP3s and other audio formats
Themes
Bugs found in Oregano 2 by RISC OS users and users of Oregan's embedded client should be fixed for Oregano 3
User interface is reasonably integrated with the RISC OS desktop

Disadvantages

Does not support RISC OS plugins, and instead relies on built-in media viewers
RISC OS platform would be competing for Oregan's time against corporate giants, which could affect support and product updates
Oregano 2 was found to be a processor intensive application, and Oregano 3 could require an XScale processor to provide a reasonably fast web surfing experience, although reportedly Oregano 3 is a lot faster than Oregano 2

NetSurf
Considered by some to be the darling of the platform, the NetSurf browser continues to be developed and updated by a team of enthusiasts. We've included it here to add some context to the debate.
Advantages

Supports most or some of HTML4, CSS1 and CSS2, cookies and SSL
Supports RISC OS plugins, so that for example, the open source Flash 3 plugin is supported
Native RISC OS application that integrates well with the desktop
Lightweight browser that runs at an acceptable speed, even on a StrongARM processor
Open source software, so that any one can contribute to the project and the application therefore enjoys continuous updates and freely available releases
Supports image and pop-up ad blocking

Disadvantages

Lack of Javascript support prevents NetSurfers from using a significant number of websites
It's still in active development with no stable version released yet, meaning that users often end up playing Russian Roulette when they download and try out a new version

WebsterXL
Published by R-Comp, this commercial web browser has been around since the mid-1990s, and included here for completeness.
Advantages

Supports HTML3.2 (with control over how individual tags are treated), SSL and cookies
Supports common Javascript
Group websites in terms of security priviledges granted
Can act as a HTML rendering plugin for other software and supports RISC OS web browser plugins
Customisable user interface than can be 'skinned'
Supports WAV audo files
Free upgrades, released as problems with popular websites are fixed

Disadvantages

Incomplete Javascript and web standards support leaves websites inaccesible
Arguably, very little is known about it

Updated at 14:26 25/03/05
Added WebsterXL information.

Links
Firefox FAQ
Comments?

This article has been linked to, or is available in the following formats:

[Printable] [Digg this] [Blog search]

hEgelia 17/3/05 2:26PM	Thank You Drobe... this is what I guess many of use have been waiting for... let the (constructive) discussions begin!
Jaffa (+3.1) 17/3/05 2:49PM	I'd disagree that tabbed browsing wouldn't be an advantage on RISC OS. The beauty of tabbed browsing for me is that I can set tabs to open in the background; making it trivial to read a news site like Drobe: read the front page, middle clicking on any stories of interest and then closing the front page tab; read the article open and middle click on any interesting links, close the current tab when finished; repeat. Of course, it should be trivial to modify NetSurf (or whatever) to pass the current window handle in block+28 on Wimp_OpenWindow to get the same behaviour on RISC OS, whilst still maintaining the "many windows" philosophy of the desktop.
adamr 17/3/05 2:55PM	Personally I think making any effort to implement "tabbed" browsing in a RISC OS browser would be a waste of time and effort. But if it comes "for free" with Firefox then you can't really complain I suppose! Adam
hEgelia (+2.1) 17/3/05 4:13PM	Well, I reckon it's fair to say both O3 and Firefox will hardly run on ARM610/710/7500 platforms. Even though I do my main browsing on Netsurf using an ARM710 I really think this is a 'good thing', because to keep up with developing web standards supporting those old machines would be crippling to say the least... For us ARM6/7 users Netsurf is an excellent alternative
Jaffa 17/3/05 4:25PM	*In reply to jmb:* I'd already added it to my todo list, but it's a long list and not very high priority item. Feel free to consider it a suggestion if anyone else wants to hack it.
jonix 17/3/05 4:51PM	*In reply to hEgelia:* I'd say that an excellent alternative is a cheap StrongARM card from places such as ebay and schools that are junking their stock.
caliston2 (+1.9) 17/3/05 4:59PM	I think tabbed browsing is very, very useful. Why? Well, Director tells me I have about 50 windows open at the moment. It's not unusual for me to have 100+ windows open at once, except at the moment Netsurf has run out of memory by having too many windows open. How on earth do I find a particular window? Director's menu is a bit clumsy - really I want windows ordered by function. You might say I should close some windows, but how do I know when I've finished with all those Filer windows? Or those Netsurf windows that I right clicked from and are now buried 15 windows down in the stack? Windows everywhere is my main gripe about RISC OS. One of my yet-to-be-started projects is to write something that will tab all windows. So you can have parent window holding a set of tabs for Zap windows, another for Filer windows, a third for all NettleSSH and Netsurf sessions combined. Of course windows can be liberated from tabs at any point, or dragged and dropped between them. So you have all those windows easily accessible - recycling Netsurf sessions becomes easy, as does flicking between a dozen source files in Zap. One day I'll get around to writing it...
AndrewDuffell 17/3/05 6:53PM	I would like tabbed browsing in RISC OS. It's great in firefox for some forums I read, because I can open all the forums with new topics in new tabs, then cross off the index page, and do the same for each topic with a new post.
fwibbler 17/3/05 8:52PM	Agreed! When browsing sites like The Register and eBay I often drop out of RISC OS and use Firefox for just that reason. Cheers!
mripley 18/3/05 9:11AM	If you've included one commercial application, Oregano, then you must include them all or be accused of bias. It's also a bit dodgy legally to exclude others. So can I suggeste you extend the article to include WebsterXL and Fresco (not commercial but still supported to some extent).
jess 18/3/05 9:17AM	But the article is only comparing new browsers that are still pre-release. (Netsurf still being a test version, despite being very usable)
mrchocky (-0.9) 18/3/05 9:21AM	*In reply to mr:* and then by extension all the other free browsers? It's a long list. Chris' intention with this article was to highlight browsers which are undergoing active development and bringing new features to RISC OS. I can't believe that readers would be particularly interested in hearing about WebsterXL or Frescoin this article except in historical context.
dgs (+1.0) 18/3/05 9:42AM	*In reply to mripley:* "a bit dodgy legally to exclude others" I'm not sure I understand that. What laws would be involved? *In reply to mrchocky:* Is WebsterXL no longer undergoing active development? dgs
dgs 18/3/05 10:20AM	*In reply to mrchocky:* "I don't know, but that's not all of what I said, so I think you're just trolling" Actually it was a serious question. It does seem odd that you'd make such a comment about WebsterXL if you don't actually know and haven't bothered to check. Not that I use WebsterXL myself, though dgs
mrchocky (-0.9) 18/3/05 10:55AM	Serious or not, it's not all of what I said :p But more directly, when was the last time we saw a WXL release, and how many new features did it add, and could that be seriously considered "active developmnt"? Whilst I'm happy to believe that it might still have bits being poked in it, for all practical purposes it does seem like it has gone down the same road as every single other commerical RISC OS browser. Which is why I carefully used the wording that I did.
mrchocky 18/3/05 11:06AM	To partly answer my own question, RComp did mention updates to WXL at the SW show, but no details of what they were.
arawnsley (+3.1) 18/3/05 11:11AM	WXL remains the only RISC OS web browser to handle a number of sites/systems, and remains the only one to offer many features (see previous threads). However, I'm glad chocky didn't include it in the article, for reasons obvious from this thread. Once firefox is ported, maybe my first sentence will be invalid (at least in part), who knows? We'll still continue developing, though, so...
arawnsley (+4.6) 18/3/05 11:27AM	Recent new features Security window allows control over popups, javascript, and other features on a profile/site basis. Similar to Security settings in IE, this allows users to control what happens from (say) HTML emails and the like. Addition of ability to save page with images, scripts, CSS files etc, in a form which can be guaranteed to reload correctly. Support for many additional Javascript commands and document properties, including the switch/case commands (which I believe weren't part of earlier Javascript specs, although I could be proven wrong) and various other Javascript components. The JS routines have had a number of enhancements to allow openning of more browser/document objects. Table handling via the Javascript has also received much attention. Various additional JS syntaxes and styles of coding (hard to describe, but there are many ways to crack eggs in something like JS) have been added and supported. (pauses for breath). Code that allows WXL to act as a plugin to other applications has been updated (so other apps can render HTML if required). CSS1 / CSS2 parser has been updated to handle additional properties, and deal with various syntactical issues which we have seen on some sites. Often a browser needs to handle erronious data intelligently, which is a big challenge for browser authors! Various aspects of page rendering have been enhanced including tables, with some speed optimisations. I think that covers some part of what we've done post-christmas. Given that WXL is already more feature-laden than any other RISC OS browser, I hope that passes the test.
MENTAT (-1.0) 18/3/05 11:58AM	*In reply to mrchocky:* Frescoin :o Are you implying that the vigay is getting rich from Fresco?
diomus 18/3/05 12:17PM	*In reply to arawnsley:* If WXL is "more feature-laden than any other RISC OS browser", why have you not sent us a revised features list, and why did you turn down a recent request to review WXL? If WXL is doing well at the moment, why keep it to yourself? If you send me a list of features together with what you consider to be WXL's pros and cons, I'll update the article. Any other WXL users are encouraged to email in too. *In reply to mripley:* I would like to say that there is no bias in the article. It was intended to present the pros and cons of Oregano 3 and Firefox (both recently proposed and hence within public interest), and Netsurf was shown as a reference case. There're certainly no laws over what can and can't be reviewed, otherwise reviews sections in magazines would be extinct by now.
mripley 18/3/05 2:40PM	A review is different from the above list which implies (and actually written by Mr Naulls) that only those browsers are being developed (I'm assuming that's what Mr Naulls meant by developmnt ). A review is an opinion of something and thus is fare game. But to provide a comparison list of supposed active browsers and leaving one off is a different thing altogether.
diomus 18/3/05 3:06PM	ok, review was the wrong word to use. Either way, I've invited R-Comp to bring me up to speed on their product. The ommission of WXL from the above list was because it's not been in the news recently.
benc (+1.5) 18/3/05 3:07PM	I think one aspect of the browser wars which deserves more emphasis - is support. Of all the commercial browsers the only one which has had a consistent stream of updates over the years is WXL. This is what in my mind sets RComp above certain other providers. My main concern with O3 is the track record of updates for O1 and O2. Why should O3 be any different? I would like to hear OreganoUK say warm fuzzy things about how it will remain updated this time around! Otherwise Firefox seems a far more sane approach to futureproofing a browser than O3.
arawnsley 18/3/05 4:23PM	Sounds like I need to drop you an email Chris. Don't read my unresponsiveness to email you a free copy of WXL as disrespect for drobe. We've had some bad experiences with non-reviews from some quarters (ie. they get their software and never write about it) and that makes me rather cynical these days.
Leo (+1.5) 18/3/05 5:59PM	*In reply to benc:* Hi, "My main concern with O3 is the track record of updates " "for O1 and O2. Why should O3 be any different?" Updates for Oregano 1 stopped because the code was being rewritten to be portable, and updates for Oregano 2 stopped because large sections of the code was rewritten to add support for CSS 2 and DOM 2 (This took slightly longer than expected). Now that the above work has been completed there shouldn't be a need for any major code changes for the forseeable future. So upgrades for Oregano 3 should be available at about the same time as they are released for the other platforms supported. Leo
benc 18/3/05 6:13PM	*In reply to leo:* Many thanks for the prompt reply! That certainly eases my concerns about O3 (and hopefully a few other peoples as well)
Leo 18/3/05 6:28PM	*In reply to benc:* "Many thanks for the prompt reply! " Not a problem, I think the question has already come up in the Oregano mailing list (Or maybe on the newsgroup) once already this week, but information is so spread out at the moment that its worth mentioning it again here. Leo
3 comment(s) are below your moderation threshold. Login to view them.
Use the forum for more comments on this article