Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Camino 1.0 Released
Mini-Geek writes "MozillaZine is reporting that Mozilla Camino 1.0 has been released. The latest release includes a new tab bar appearance, pause and resume for downloads, improved advertisement and popup blocking, enhanced certificate support, bundled java embedding plugin, form fill from Address Book and inline search of history and bookmarks. See the Camino 1.0 Release Notes for more details."
http://www.caminobrowser.org/download/releases/1.0 /
Will be cool to see how this stacks up against the latest Firefox - on OSX I've actually started using Safari more than FF - but maybe Camino will change that. Nice to have options.
fak3r.com
According to the site, it is a "Gecko based native Mac OS X browser." How is it different from Firefox?
Any "Gecko is slow and bloated" arguments can be put to rest with Camino. Before it was a universal binary, Camino weighed in at about 7MB and it absolutely smokes any other Mac browser in terms of performance.
there's more than one way to do me.
The link in the story appears broken. Here's the actual ,a href="http://www.caminobrowser.org/releases/1.0.ph p">Camino 1.0 release notes
Let's try this again: Camino 1.0 Release Notes
I think I'm going to be a switcher from Firefox. The only problem is that I am having trouble finding some of the extensions I need. Camitools is a good start, but frankly I consider mouse gestures to be essential.
My first impression upon hearing this was "did they speed it up"?
Using it early before FireFox came out, it wasn't my first, second, or thrid browser of choice on the Mac, I even prefered IE over it.
FireFox still is kind of slow on the OSX, so I won't hold my breath that Camino improves upon it much. Why wouldn't FireFox have the best tech in it compared to Camino?
But I will give it a try, neither FF or Safari I would say are wonders on the Mac platform. There is only room for improvment for web browsing on Mac's.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Interesting to note that they've released Camino 1.0 as a universal binary.
I believe this makes it only the third released browser to run natively on Intel Macs. Safari was naturally the first, followed by Shiira a few weeks ago.
The Opera 9 previews have been universal, so we can expect native support when that's released (anyone know when?), and Firefox should be there with the next bugfix/stability release, 1.5.0.2, due (IIRC) in mid-to-late March. Strangely, OmniWeb is still PowerPC only, even though the rest of OmniGroup's lineup has universal binaries already.
Btw, welcome to the wonderful world of universal binaries: multilingual download is now whopping 19.5 MBytes!
But still, quite a nice browser, although not yet enough to make me drop Safari.
“Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
... apparently. But, hey, they is Slashdot so we all know every Mozilla project on every platform before it even makes a 1.0 release, right?
It would've been nicer if the summary actually mentioned that this was a browser for Mac OS X. My first thought was that this is another 1.0 product I should avoid since it's crap anyway on the PC. However, a Mac OS X product is different. It should work until the patch comes out.
It looks really fast, but I'm not sure if that's just an social trick or a real stat. There seems to be a half a beat pause after I first click a link (during the "contacting the website" phase), then the page almost instantly appears. In contrast, Safari begins rendering almost immediately, but takes half a beat to finish. I've seen this with both the BBC and CNN, with ESPN's dynamic content ADD-fest loading progressively but in the same basic manner (Safari starts first, both finish about the same).
So I'm not sure if Camino is truly faster or simply looks faster because it's extending a time-point that we expect to have a pause in (waiting for data from the server) and shrinking a time-point that we attribute to the program itself.
Well, I just tried Camino 1.0 on my 2.0 GHz G5. Maybe Camino runs faster on slower machines, but on mine there was no speed difference with respect to FireFox (1.0.6). The choice for me seems to come down to extensions vs. integrated keyring management... I think extensions win.
I've been using Camino since it wasn't really all that stable. My question (which I've also posed to the developers) is - when someone is going to include a 'Search Web for "x"' right-click option? This is probably the single most-utilized feature of Firefox that I have come across. And it's not even a clever extension, it's in there right out of the box. Even better would be the ability to link this to multiple/different search engines through preferences. I've looked for this, and the developers said this had been brought up, but made no mention of plans to actually implement this feature.
It "absolutely smokes any other Mac broswer in terms of performance?" I'm sorry, have you ever actually used a Mac? Camino is significantly faster than Firefox, more stable and integrated much better, but it certainly doesn't "smoke" Safari. Don't get me wrong, it's my Gecko browser of choice on the Mac, but it doesn't "smoke" Safari by any stretch of the imagination.
Oh quit with the Budweiser advertising already! ;)
Why the hell don't I have this in FireFox? Is this yet another case where behaviour that should be standard is only available in an extension?
How we know is more important than what we know.
It's much snappier!
Nothing to see here, move along. It's still pretty fucking far from being Cocoa, which is immediately evident for those of us who mix "scripts" and "character sets" on web sites. So, no ATSUI. Icelandic characters are approximated by another font than the one specified in the style sheet. The same for Chinese characters outside the GB2312 range. All using Unicode, of course.
It is also slower than Safari, which is still the undisputed king on the Mac.
Can anyone recommend a way to get adblocking comparable to adblock plus for firefox/mozilla? and no, usercontent.css doesnt count. i want context menus, with the abillity to block images/flash/iframes using simple wildcard string (none of that overly complex regexp stuff, i dont want to learn a syntax just to block an ad).
im actually using safari with safariblock & saft right now since firefox for OS X is so horribly slow. I used camino for a fortnight and loved the responsivness but blocking ads was to much effort, and to many would just still show up using camitools. i would jump to camino in a second if its adblocking even matched safariblocks featureset
TIAEAE!
Ever since Mac OS X 10.4 or there abouts, Gecko (Firefox has the same problem) has been unable to measure text properly, for some reason. Many pages end up with text hanging raggedly out of the right hand side, white space is missing in front of links, or else links completely overlap the surrounding text. Text entry boxes are unusable because the cursor winds up somewhere to the left of the most recent character entered.
I used to love Camino, and I try all of the betas, and post updates on bugzilla, but it's just useless to me at the moment. Pity.
Safari isn't that bad, after all.
-- Andrew
and it works quite well - at least the few sites i checked were ad-free after turning on the ad-blocking in the preferences
check out the screenshot
I block ads at etc/hosts... it doesn't matter what browser I use then. I'd like to see Camino able to add sites to the etc/hosts file on the fly using contextual menu choices, but other than that, it's easy and effective to block ads at the source.
heh, thats hardly comparable /etc/hosts doesnt collapse removed items, leaving big gaps where the ads were. barely any better than having the ad there /etc/host doesnt allow you to selectively block content from a server. ie, when a site hosts its own ads you're stuffed.
a:
b:
TIAEAE!
I guess the collapsing thing is a Camino feature then, because I don't see the gaps you are talking about. As for sites hosting their own ads, there simply aren't enough of those to annoy me.
Why can't browsers share as many preferences and other data as possible. I want all my browsers to have the smae history, bookmarks, cookies and so on. However, Camino doesn't even read its sibling Firefox' data.
4 7
I know that Camino uses Mac OS X specific technologies like the Keychaing and the built in spell checker. However, I think that solution is less than ideal, to ease migration, both to and from Camino, I think it should at least offer the user to share prefs and other data with Firefox. Or, the other way around, share data with Safari.
At least one of these ways should be possible - Firefox because it has the same foundation, Safari because they utilize the same frameworks and functionality built in into Cocoa. I feel that this issue suffers a slight NIH-syndrome.
There is a request in bugzilla for this functionality but it is marked as WONTFIX https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3015
Right now, I mostly use Firefox on my Mac for the extensions. If I wanted a "Mac feel" or higher performance, I would use Safari, which (understandably) is much more optimized and integrated than even Camino.
What would I gain by using Camino over Safari?
Thanks for pointing this out.
I was interested up until this point. Once you've used Adblock (or PithHelmet on Safari, a shareware tool that does effectively the same thing) you'll never, ever go back to a "stock" browser. Or at least, I never will. It's a "killer feature" if I've ever seen one.
Somebody wake me up when they get a clue and build ad blocking into the browser like they should.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."