3 ms·
It's a nice idea, but I think it's unfortunate that so many of these "new browsers" are just UIs on top of Gecko or KHTML/WebKit/Chromium. The reason I use oth
by chriswarbo 12y ago
It's a nice idea, but I think it's unfortunate that so many of these "new browsers" are just UIs on top of Gecko or KHTML/WebKit/Chromium.
The reason I use other browsers (w3m, dillo, netsurf) alongside FF is because they're faster and take fewer resources. That's the point of a minimalist application. I wouldn't call an application minimalist if it has a behemoth running underneath, with a large attack surface, many hiding places for bugs, sucking up GBs of RAM.
- why-el 12y agoWhich one of those (w3m, dillo, netsurf) is your favorite? And how do you deal with privacy in the absence of addons such as Ghostry, adblock, and so on?
- chriswarbo 12y agow3m is my favourite alternative, since it's nicely integrated into Emacs. Dillo is good for a throw-away browser window, eg. to check something quickly on Wikipedia. Netsurf is useful as a prettier Dillo (eg. for sites which are confusing without some CSS). For ad blocking, etc. I use http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ In FF I use AdBlock and NoScript. I don't have Flash installed.
- eloisant 12y agoWriting a new rendering engine today is a huge task. You have no idea of the complexity of positioning, CSS, rendering... The best way to innovate in the browser market is indeed to use an existing rendering engine.
- chriswarbo 12y ago> You have no idea of the complexity of positioning, CSS, rendering... I have some idea. Besides, a rendering engine doesn't need to reinvent all of the wheels down to the metal. CSS is optional. > The best way to innovate in the browser market is indeed to use an existing rendering engine. Well, it's subjective. If you care about "markets", then indeed a custom rendering engine would be wasted effort. If you care about rendering engines, then "markets" are a waste of effort ;)