Phoenix 0.2 Web Browser: Lean, Mean Mozilla

GonzoJohn writes "Linux Orbit reviews the Phoenix 0.2 web browser: 'I've never been a huge fan of the Mozilla web browser. It's too big and too slow in my opinion. I like the Opera web browser a lot, but it is closed source, ad supported (for the free version) or costs money (if you want to get rid of the banner ads). Opera is almost exactly what I'm looking for in a web browser as far as features are concerned: fast, browser window tabs, mouse gesturing, and I can configure the interface a little. It has its problems, no doubt. Java and Javascript are big tripping points for it to name just a few. But speed is what I'm looking for. Then along comes Mozilla's Phoenix web browser. Phoenix still uses a lot of the Mozilla code. In fact, Phoenix code is based completely on Mozilla code, so the development should move rather quickly. Here is a link to a road map for what it's developers think is a close time-line for its development. Although still in heavy development, I have found Phoenix quite useable and stable even in the early 0.2 release and I continue to download the nightly release every day.'"

Comments

Roadmap Link

[neurostar]

Here is the link to the roadmap: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/phoenix/phoenix-ro admap.html

neurostar

Faster? On what OS?

[OrenWolf]

Since about Mozilla 0.8 or so, Mozilla has rendered faster than any version of IE. The startup times left a little to be desired, but a lot of that is fixed by Mozilla's Quicklaunch option.

Sure it uses RAM, but so does IE, and not in "IEXPLORE.EXE" either - most of that code is integrated right into the Windows Explorer code.

A lot of people who have claimed Mozilla is "too big and slow" have never used a 1.0+ build I would assume, or are trying to compare Moz for Linux (which is =much= slower than it's Windows counterpart), with Moz for Windows.

Re:Faster? On what OS?

[legLess]

Blockquothe the poster:

Mozilla has rendered faster than any version of IE

You're 100% ass-backwards on that one, pal. I timed it and the difference in rendering speed alone is incredible - IE kicks Moz's ass. Now, I've used Moz as my primary browser for over a year, and I don't intend to go back, but let's call a spade a spade shall we?

In the most recent versions of both browsers I just opened the most recent MySQL manual - over 2MB of HTML in one file. My machine's a Duron 750 with 512MB, running Win2k. I timed rendering speed only - the file is served locally, and the browsers already started - I navigated to the file from a link on an otherwise blank (local) page. I timed from when I clicked the link:

• IE: 1.5 seconds
• Mozilla: 8 seconds

In short, Mozilla has a long way to go before it renders pages faster than IE.

(This is a repost of an earlier comment of mine).

Re:Faster? On what OS?

[edwdig]

What you're rendering makes a big difference. I had a friend download Mozilla and had him load a Slashdot page with almost 1000 comments with the threshold at -1 in both IE and Mozilla. I don't know what the specs were on his machine. IE took about 8 seconds according to my watch, whereas Mozilla took about 2 seconds according to the status bar indication. Obviously the IE timing isn't very accurate, but it was still a huge difference.

Re:Faster? On what OS?

[bogie]

Yea because opening a single 2MB html is likely....

For general web browsing on my cable connection Moz is always just as faster and sometimes faster than IE.

Lets take a real world example shall we.

I just loaded foxnews.com on IE it took about 6.25 seconds to load. On Moz it took about 4.5. Oh, IE will do its best by throwing whatever meager bits of code it get up first, but the entire page loads faster in Mozilla.

www.time.com Mozilla 4 seconds, IE 5 seconds.
www.merck.com Mozilla 4.5, IE 4.75

The point is your example is a red herring.

"the difference in rendering speed alone is incredible - IE kicks Moz's ass."

Apparantly not.

Re:Weird Weird Weird

[EyesWideOpen]

There is only one thing missing that may force me back to mozilla: the inability to "block images from this server," i.e., to get rid of ads.

That feature is targeted for the 0.3 release (October 8th) according to this (search on page for 'Image blocking').

Re:Yuck.

[leshert]

We can write software to manage checkbooks, to run space shuttles, to even serve more porn than the world ever needs.

But we can't get a decent browser out the door.

Why? Why is this?


Because a browser that does what you want it to do is significantly more complex than any of the three examples you gave.

Re:browser requirements

[selmer]

Turn on enable pipelining in preferences->advanced->http-networking, it greatly improves your porn browsing-speed.

Re:the myth of the lightweight browser

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Do some more reading. It seems as if they understand the problem.
A small snippet from the FAQ:

The extensions "manager" (really just a tab in a pref panel) is not bloat -- in fact, we're working so hard to support extensions to reduce bloat. Without extensions support, we'd be pressured to include the add-ons in the default build. And, finally, Satchel replaces Mozilla's bloated and complicated form manager.

Phoenix FAQ

Re:IE

[cioxx]

I am replying to this post in Phoenix 0.2 running on Windows 2000.

SWEET MERCIFUL CHRIST ON A MOTORCYCLE TALKING ON A MOBILE PHONE!@$ This thing is fast as hell.

I'm really glad it did not go the way of Mozilla interface, which looks like Netscape. Part of the Mozilla trouble is just that. People presume it's the "old" netscape and are reluctant to keep it on their systems.

Furthermore, I love it how Phoenix does not integrate into your OS like a multi-headed hydra. Tabbed browsing is a plus. Still achievable with netcaptor on IE 5.x/6.x but not a native application.

This will be the browser I will use on Win2k when they figure out how to dock the google toolbar on it.

Also, many windows users confuse the IE loadtime with page render time. It's a common misconseption. I am sold on Phoenix.

couldn't agree more

[Dave_bsr]

People sometimes just ignore the facts. You learn to deal with it.

Add to that already-beautiful list of "mozilla is sweeter" features:

Portability - I can use the same browser on my linux box at home as I can in the windows labs at my university - which is great, IMO.

Mozilla Composer/Mail/Add-ons - free stuff that people forget are included with the full install - you shouldn't ignore those nice freebies.

There are several other "cool" things I like about Moz, like zoom ( ctrl + ), image blocking by server, etc. - but I don't know if IE implements these as well.

Moz isn't perfect, no. But it is my favorite. Phoenix is pretty sweet though - it may steal my browsing crown soon.

Mozilla, in the form of an ActiveX control

[yerricde]

Create an ActiveX gecko to use instead of MSHTML.DLL

As you said, the IE engine is an ActiveX control. Here's a Gecko ActiveX control, and it even comes with a program that patches programs that embed IE so that they embed Gecko instead.

But ActiveX will get you nowhere on the other (non-Windows) platforms tnat Moz supports. Therefore, an ActiveX based Gecko browser for Windows should really be a separate project.

Anti-aliased fonts? Heres how...

[Markos]

Go into your Phoenix or Mozilla directory.

Edit the file defaults/pref/unix.js at about line 230.

Change
pref("font.FreeType2.enable", false);
to
pref("font.FreeType2.enable", true);

And there you go!.

You probably should also tinker with font.antialias.min,
font.scale.tt_bitmap.dark_text.min and font.scale.tt_bitmap.dark_text.gain until the fonts look good to you.