Slashdot Mirror

Sounds like it's time to move to netsurf, which supports Linux, Mac, Windows, among a few others. It's open source, FWIW (but so is Chromium).

I'm putting my hopes in Netsurf. It doesn't really support Javascript yet, but maybe that's not a bad thing. Also it's written in C, not C++ which is a big plus in my eyes.

A lot of website functionality is built with JavaScript - that's just a fact of life.

It wasn't a fact of life 5 years back. DHTML was dead and all developers were begining to understand that web pages should degrade gracefully for UA's that do not have scripting engines.

As to the functionality, d2 removed basic functionality like "show me all comments above $threshold". Clicking "$x more comments" multiple times is not (IMHO) an improvement -- never mind the overall flakyness of the new comment system.

You don't have to enable it, but you really can't complain when websites don't cater to the small minority of users who either disable or block all scripts.

I can complain and just did.

We're trying to get sites not to support the dying number of IE6 users, and I'd be willing to bet the % of users not using JS is even lower than IE6 users.

This is because the IE box model is incorrect and it lacks support for alpha in PNG etc. This is an issue because IE6 users expect to see sites render correctly and that effectively means using ugly hacks or creating 2 sets of CSS for layout. Nobody is suggesting that users of javascript-free browsers (NetSurf, dillo or lynx) need to switch browsers.

If all sites were simply written in HTML there would be a lot less 'web' out there.

No there would be more, simply because search engines could index it.

It's a toy.

As noted in the summary, there's a firefox extension for vim-like keybindings. Arora already provides a lightweight QTWebKit based browser and we already have lynx, links and w3m. WebKit is C++ and not exactly what I'd call lightweight. NetSurf OTH is lightweight, written in C and modular. Dillo switched to fltk, but I assume their backend code is still in C? These codebases would lend themselves better to creating a unix-like browser; one using separate processes interconnected via IPC. Why anybody would want to do such a thing is an exercise left to the reader.

I struggle to see how uzbl is unix-like when a single monolithic program (WebKit) handles the parsing, layout and rendering for the whole thing. Of course, the "unix like" paradigm never applied to desktop applications (there's a reason so few people run Plan9).

It is a thin wrapper over WebKit.

No, it looks like it has its own HTML renderer:
http://www.netsurf-browser.org/documentation/progress#WebStandards
http://www.netsurf-browser.org/documentation/develop#Compiling

It is a thin wrapper over WebKit.

No, it looks like it has its own HTML renderer:
http://www.netsurf-browser.org/documentation/progress#WebStandards
http://www.netsurf-browser.org/documentation/develop#Compiling

Netsurf is a little known, low resource browser that's worth watching. It started life as a RISC OS (Acorn) browser but it's now cross platform. The show stopper is that it doesn't yet support javascript, but they're working on it.

I believe NetSurf has more modern rendering engine than dillo, while being as light (or lighter).

I don't like Opera, or more specifically while the underlying layout engine (presto) is perfectly okay; I don't like the feel of QT or anything about their GUI design. The mail client is also teh fail if the user has multiple IMAP accounts across multiple host and servers.

Back to the GUI design, sleek it ain't, Opera and IE7 are the cluttered ugly cousins of web browsing. I find Safari, Firefox, konqueror and even simple browsers like GTK netsurf and dillo to be more usable.

> As a bonus I get a more secure browser...

No, you get a browser with fewer reported security vulns that isn't as widely targeted by malware as IE, Fx or even Safari.