[chris v]

I haven't seen a real speed increase in OW in a while, but betas 3 and 4 seem quite a bit faster than SP's 61-67, and Beta 2, which were all about the same speed. I usually check my homepage with a new OW version first, and when I loaded it up tonight (cable modem) it made me blink and wince a little. Rather than the images rendering one by one, and filling the page top to bottom, they all just flashed on at once. Definitely a serious speed increase here, though I haven't tested it head to head with Chimera. Scrolls pretty quick, too.

My Javascript (buggy GoLive variety) rollovers still misbehave when I use the back button to return to my index page, which I wish I could find a fix for. (short of learning to hand-code them. It's not worth the effort for one browser) Using the "home" links at the bottom of of my inside pages, however doesn't cause the screw-up. Just the back button.

It sure does look nice with the Smooth Aqua theme, set to Graphite, though. Very elegant app, overall.

CV

[cpac]

Originally posted by foamy:
<STRONG>Sorry Guy Incognito.... you are on drugs

Omni is NOT faster than Chimera. Not even close on my machine(Ti550) and a T3.

Maybe over modem it does better?</STRONG>

I get Guy's results (faster than Chimera) on my TiBook500 over cable modem/airport

Originally posted by foamy:
<STRONG>Sorry Guy Incognito.... you are on drugs

Omni is NOT faster than Chimera. Not even close on my machine(Ti550) and a T3.

Maybe over modem it does better?</STRONG>

You want me to whip some Snapz Pro X action movie shots of OW speeding by Chimera? It's actually breathtaking.

Whip up even.

I'm sure there are some sites OW might stall on. But the sites I visit...such as MacNN, were faster on OW than Chimera. I kid you not.

Cable modem...Dual-800 G4.

[maguirer]

I'm using OWb4 and am quite happy with the performance. However, is anyone getting pages where not all the images are loading. I have "automatically load with page" and "draw placeholders when loading" turned on, as well as the default image filters turned on, and the other two checkboxes in the Privacy pane turned off. Images that should be loaded aren't. I hit Refresh and sometimes they'll load and then others won't load, like they're getting skipped over when they shouldn't be. I've got an 867Mhz G4.

A perfect example are these forums. I hit refresh and each time a handful of random images don't load, until I explicitly tell OmniWeb to load them individually. Futzing with the options in the Preferences don't seem to make a bit of difference (well, except the "automatically load with page" option obviously). Anyone else experiencing this?

On a related note, the images on the following page won't load:
http://homepage.mac.com/maguirer/

Oddly they won't load in OW b4, b2, nor b1, nor in Opera b4, nor in IE 5.1, nor in Netscape 6.2, but they load fine in iCab 2.7.1 (they also load OK in IE6 for Windows).

[ 04-16-2002: Message edited by: maguirer ]

[ratlater]

I must say the OmniWeb performs much better against the competition on faster hardware. I haven't done actual testing, but on my dual 500 OmniWeb is just as fast as Chimera for most sites, but on my iBook 500 Chimera blows OmniWeb away.

-md

[foamy]

Don't get me wrong. Omni beta4 is clearly faster than previous versions, just on my hardware and connection Chimera beats it hands down.

Maybe you have a munged Chimera prefs, or maybe I have a munged Omni pref?

[Rickster]

As an Omni customer, your response was... disappointing.

My apologies. However, this forum is not an official channel for feedback -- we don't have the money to make it somebody's job to read it all day. Granted, Ken, myself, and others do spend a good bit of time here, and it's quite likely that we'll notice and act on feedback presented. But we might not notice everything. If you want to ensure that your bug report or feature request makes it into somebody's to-do list, you should send feedback directly to us.

Hey, Rick...do you have an idea if instant-back is still going to be possible in OW5?

I can't promise anything this early, but I don't see why not.

My Javascript (buggy GoLive variety) rollovers still misbehave when I use the back button to return to my index page, which I wish I could find a fix for.

View Source on http://www.omnigroup.com/ . The rollover code there works in every major browser we've tested it in, doesn't have problems with instant-Back in OmniWeb, and is shorter and more efficient than most of the "prerolled" rollover code produced by the likes of GoLive and Dreamweaver.

I must say the OmniWeb performs much better against the competition on faster hardware.

Not surprising -- OmniWeb is the only web browser to really use the second CPU in dual-processor Macs.

[ 04-16-2002: Message edited by: Rickster ]

[Synotic]

I am not sure if this is already addressed... I am using 4.1 sneaky peek 61 (v372) but...

But you know those Java dialogs, for instance, the ones that pop up when you click on one of the Instant UBB Code buttons below? Why must it a spawn a seperate alert? Wouldn't this be the perfect opportunity to use sheets as it only applies to the current thread window. It seems kind of foolish that the entire browser should be halted for an alert/dialog meant only for one window. For instance, if the browser wasn't basically temporarily-unusable, a person could press the and switch to the window containing the image, get the URL of the image, go back to the window, and paste it into the sheet. It's really confusing when you can still switch windows.. yet the alert stays foremost.. it makes it nearly impossible what the alert corresponds to. It would seem to be me that it would only be a quick update in the code that would make OmniWeb much more pleasant to use.. no?

[starfleetX]

Originally posted by Synotic:
<STRONG>But you know those Java dialogs, for instance, the ones that pop up when you click on one of the Instant UBB Code buttons below? Why must it a spawn a seperate alert? [...]</STRONG>

Yesiree Bob! That's one thing I like about Chimera that Omni should *really* consider adopting.

[flysky]

Rick:

I asked this toward the bottom of the page a couple back, so it was easy to miss ...

What's the status of Exchange support in 4.1? I assume that if something isn't working in Beta 4, it won't be working in final, but at the moment I can read messages--which is great--but I can't reply or forward, and I can't use the calendar, etc.

If 4.1 isn't going to add more functionality, do you have any idea when Omni may get to it? Using OmniWeb to read work email almost makes it enjoyable ...

[JKT]

Originally posted by asxless:
<STRONG>

Rickster,

As an Omni customer, your response was... disappointing.

If Omni (the owner/vendor of OmniWeb) wants to make sure they get my (the paying customer's) feedback on OmniWeb bugs / issues, Omni will peruse this and other related threads on public forums. As I have said before, I post bugs / issues with commercial applications in public forums to inform other _users_ of potential problems and/or seek their experience(s). If the _vendor_ chooses to frequent these forums looking for bugs / issues, great. If not, they are ignoring a valuable source of feedback to improve their product. I have already paid for the product, it is not my 'job' to go to the extra effort to provide the same bug/issue report through a vendor prescribed non-public mechanism.

Of course, Omni may not be interested enough in this paid user's feedback to go to the trouble to peruse this and other related threads on public forums. That's OK. After using Mozilla as my main browser for several months and monitoring the compatibility of the OW SPs/betas with sites I frequent, it is astonishingly unlikely that I will ever pay for an upgrade to OW.

asxless in iLand</STRONG>

asxless, you are using OmniWeb in OSX. Highlight the text of your posts, go to the Services menu and select Mail Text. Mail will open with your text as the body of a Compose window - add a few bits to it if you need to (e.g. I also posted this at MacNN...) and then mail it to Omni. No need to write your message(s) twice. (Obviously, cut and paste would be an easy option to)

Also, don't be such an ass. Name one other company that frequents public forums (other than their own) and offers to use posts their as feedback. FWIW, if you want Omni to give you feedback at a forum, use their Mailing list for OmniWeb where you will get feedback from both OW users *and* Omni.

[Gee4orce]

Beta-4 absolutely flies on my machine with an ethernet connection. YMMV.

[Since EBCDIC]

Reported with Send Feedback, but for others:

4.1b3: This page fails with This page points the browser back at itself when trying to use any of the See It At {vendorname} links. Annoying. Works in MSIE.

[Diggory Laycock]

Highlight the text of your posts, go to the Services menu and select Mail Text.

Just noticed that mail sticks the selected text *after* the signature. Silly Mail

[asxless]

Originally posted by JKT:
...Name one other company that frequents public forums (other than their own) and offers to use posts their as feedback. FWIW, if you want Omni to give you feedback at a forum, use their Mailing list for OmniWeb where you will get feedback from both OW users *and* Omni.

Somehow I knew at least one Omni supporter / sycophant would take a jab at my post. Thanks for giving me an opportunity to expand on it.

Unfortunately, it is not the relative difficulty / ease of posting to a "Mailing list" that keeps me from using these feedback mechanisms. It is the use of a Mailing list period. Email is simply a poor mechanism for the _user_ to monitor the result of their feedback on several different products with several different vendors.

Best practice in user support/feedback is to provide a public forum on the vendor site. ONE company that does this is Connectix http://www.connectix.com/cgi-bin/ubb...cgi?category=1 Yes it is on their own site, but it is 'public' in the sense that I can view posts of others who have reported issues. I also get to see the responses from the Connectix developers. Their use of a bulletin board allows the feedback to be organized and easily monitored for the _users_ specific issue of interest. FWIW I used their public feedback system to document/describe the specific conditions that cause an Airport equipped Mac running VPC 5.x to loose all network connectivity and also posted a work around. BTW Connectix believes that this is due to a basic flaw in the firmware of Airport and all Lucent based 802.11b network cards.

IMHO, the hierarchy of feedback systems from a _users_ perspective looks like this...
Unacceptable - No users feedback system at all.
Poor - Apple's 'black hole' web / email forms with no response to the user.
Good - Omni's "Mail list" with developer responses.
Better - OmniWeb developers monitoring and responding in public forums.
Best Practice - Connectix providing a 'public' forum for user feedback and monitoring.

On last thing, if Omni and/or OmniWeb could not be improved, this thread would not exist.

asxless in iLand

[ 04-17-2002: Message edited by: asxless ]

[shortcipher]

scrolling is much improved over previous versions, i had more or less given up using Omniweb as the sites I frequent the most use lots of nested tables, which Omniweb didnt cope with all that well - ironic really, that Omniweb coped so badly with the very forums where people who love Omniweb hang out!

anyway, things seem much improved now, Ill spend some time in the forums and see how it goes.

[asxless]

Originally posted by Rickster:
My apologies. However, this forum is not an official channel for feedback -- we don't have the money to make it somebody's job to read it all day. Granted, Ken, myself, and others do spend a good bit of time here, and it's quite likely that we'll notice and act on feedback presented. But we might not notice everything. If you want to ensure that your bug report or feature request makes it into somebody's to-do list, you should send feedback directly to us.

Rick,

Thanks for your reply / explanation. Please see my preivious post for a suggestion for how Omni might improve their user feedback system via a 'public' forum on Omni's own site.

asxless in iLand

[JKT]

Originally posted by asxless:
<STRONG>

Somehow I knew at least one Omni supporter / sycophant would take a jab at my post. Thanks for giving me an opportunity to expand on it.

Unfortunately, it is not the relative difficulty / ease of posting to a "Mailing list" that keeps me from using these feedback mechanisms. It is the use of a Mailing list period. Email is simply a poor mechanism for the _user_ to monitor the result of their feedback on several different products with several different vendors.

Best practice in user support/feedback is to provide a public forum on the vendor site. ONE company that does this is Connectix http://www.connectix.com/cgi-bin/ubb...cgi?category=1 Yes it is on their own site, but it is 'public' in the sense that I can view posts of others who have reported issues. I also get to see the responses from the Connectix developers. Their use of a bulletin board allows the feedback to be organized and easily monitored for the _users_ specific issue of interest. FWIW I used their public feedback system to document/describe the specific conditions that cause an Airport equipped Mac running VPC 5.x to loose all network connectivity and also posted a work around. BTW Connectix believes that this is due to a basic flaw in the firmware of Airport and all Lucent based 802.11b network cards.

IMHO, the hierarchy of feedback systems from a _users_ perspective looks like this...
Unacceptable - No users feedback system at all.
Poor - Apple's 'black hole' web / email forms with no response to the user.
Good - Omni's "Mail list" with developer responses.
Better - OmniWeb developers monitoring and responding in public forums.
Best Practice - Connectix providing a 'public' forum for user feedback and monitoring.

On last thing, if Omni and/or OmniWeb could not be improved, this thread would not exist.

asxless in iLand

[ 04-17-2002: Message edited by: asxless ]</STRONG>

Jeez, can't you take a joke? Didn't you notice the wink after my "don't be an ass"?

FWIW, the mailing list can be viewed just like a forum - go take a look at the Omniweb site here. It would be much better if they used a bulletin board, yes, but they don't (at present?). However, it is not especially difficult to use it in the current format.

OK, my point (again) is that this is not Omni's public forum, it is MacNN's - what other company uses this or any forum like it as its bug reporting/feedback site? None, nought, nowt, nada, zilch. Why should they (and why should MacNN even allow them to)? It isn't their forum, so why should Omni exploit it as such. They supply the (limited) means to do it at their own site so instead of moaning about them not using this one here, complain that their Mailing List does not suit you and could be improved by being a bulletin board or something.

Cheers.

(Edit - oh you did already... but did you send it as an e-mail? )

[ 04-17-2002: Message edited by: JKT ]

[voodoo]

Why is this thread so long? This must be the longest thread I've seen at these fora. You guys can yap more about Omniweb than philosophy and politics! Amazing!!!

[::maroma::]

This thread is so long, it makes me want to vomit my coffee and muffin all over my desk!

[asxless]

Originally posted by JKT:
Jeez, can't you take a joke? Didn't you notice the wink after my "don't be an ass"?

FWIW, the mailing list can be viewed just like a forum...
OK, my point (again) is that this is not Omni's public forum...

Jeez, don't be such a pedantic twit
I already knew how Omni's mail list works and understood your point (the first time)

asxless in iLand

[davidb224]

Originally posted by &lt;Guy Incognito&gt;:
<STRONG>I may be on drugs but OmniWeb (4.1b4) brings pages up faster than the latest Chimera (0.2.1). I've tested the websites I normally browse.</STRONG>

This is also my opinion. I have been to the websites that I frequent the most using both browsers and feel that OW 4.1b4 renders those pages faster than Chimera 0.2.1.

[ 04-17-2002: Message edited by: davidb224 ]

[Montanan]

Here's a question for the MacNN old-timers ... what was the "longest thread ever"? Is this one it, or is it getting close??

We need to set a record, here!

[Gregory]

Originally posted by foamy:
<STRONG>Sorry Guy Incognito.... you are on drugs

Omni is NOT faster than Chimera. Not even close on my machine(Ti550) and a T3.</STRONG>

But Chimera (Navigator) ADDED ITSELF to me hard coded edited .plist - ! That to me &*&*&* me off when an app does that. I didn't add it or select it as my default at any time.

For which reason, fast as it is (and it does java well enough to access an online banking system) - I don't want it. I don't trust it.

------------

Had to spend a couple days using 9.2.2 and it was amazing how fast IE 5.1.4 felt! no delays, opening web pages (5 at a time) are all smooth, no delay, no jerkiness.

[ 04-17-2002: Message edited by: Gregory ]

[CraigC]

Wow, I like Beta 4! Not only is it Snappy, it is the first version to successfully load this web page! This is the first page I check with each new release, as part of my what-has-changed routine, and it has always stalled at 'Loading item 1 of 2.' For me, this is Final Candidate 1!

[bewebste]

Here's a random OmniWeb feature that I just discovered today - double click on the zap icon in the title bar of a window, and it will open up a new window with the same page as the old one. Dunno if it's too useful, but there it is.

[JKT]

webmail.mac.com (very cool, but I hope it will include SPAM filters and a bounce to sender button when it goes final).

This is mostly working for me in OW4.1 b4 with the exception of the Address Book. I can't edit or delete names (I think it is a javascript problem btw). Same for others??

[Krypton]

Originally posted by JKT:
<STRONG>webmail.mac.com (very cool, but I hope it will include SPAM filters and a bounce to sender button when it goes final).</STRONG>

Just been playing with this - very very cool. Attach a file, and OmniWeb brings down a sheet. Unfortunately, all the images on the main page were broken when I logged in

iTools Web Mail

[cutterjohn]

my tests:
ibook 2001 dual USB
700k HTML page(local load simple HTML tags to other locally stored pages at top, main content is 2 column table)

OW 4.1b4 140M 4m
IE 5.1.4 140M 1m
Mozilla 0.99 57M 30s AND I can still open and browse other pages effectively while loading this page, OW sits and twiddles its thumbs.

Omni: Drop your browser engine and adopt gecko, simply put it works, OmniWeb sort of does as long as the pages are NOT large and do not use any modern features. Stick to the UI, and macisms. Be REALISTIC regarding your resources and EXISTING capabilities.

(Registered OW owner)

[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: cutterjohn ]

[cpac]

Originally posted by cutterjohn:
<STRONG>Omni: Drop your browser engine and adopt gecko, simply put it works, OmniWeb sort of does as long as the pages are NOT large and do not use any modern features. Stick to the UI, and macisms. Be REALISTIC regarding your resources and EXISTING capabilities.

(Registered OW owner)</STRONG>

Adopting Gecko has be discussed to death in this thread (and it's predecessor "where is OW 4.1?" or something like that). I boils down to: making OW work with Gecko is more work than writing the new 5.0 engine (which is supposed to have more standards compliance than you can shake a stick at, and because of ways they've planned the rendering, be able to blow away other browsers in terms of speed). Yes, I know, you're going to say 5.0 is years away, and that may be so, but a Gecko-powered OW would be even further away (I think the problem comes from trying to mesh C++ and Objective C, as well as dealing with strangers' code)

I find that almost every page I visit works beautifully in OW, but you apparently do not. SO USE SOMETHING ELSE. Why would we need yet another Gecko based browser if there's already Netscape and Mozilla and Chimera and...?

I, for one, prefer OW to every other browser I've tried.

Originally posted by cutterjohn:
<STRONG>my tests:
ibook 2001 dual USB
700k HTML page(local load)

OW 4.1b4 140M 4m
IE 5.1.4 140M 1m
Mozilla 0.99 57M 30s AND I can still open and browse other pages effectively while loading this page, OW sits and twiddles its thumbs.

Omni: Drop your browser engine and adopt gecko, simply put it works, OmniWeb sort of does as long as the pages are NOT large and do not use any modern features. Stick to the UI, and macisms. Be REALISTIC regarding your resources and EXISTING capabilities.

(Registered OW owner)</STRONG>

Could you make that page available for download...I don't believe you or your stickin' tests.

[starfleetX]

Originally posted by &lt;Guy Incognito&gt;:
<STRONG>Could you make that page available for download...I don't believe you or your stickin' tests.</STRONG>

I've done tests like this MANY times before, and whenever you use a large test page and/or a page with heavy tables, OmniWeb always comes out as the slowest. Not satisfied? Fine, I've just done some tests for you. Here are my results from loading a 522k saved html file from my desktop. Each browser was loaded "fresh" and cache was cleared. No other tasks were using the CPUs. I got about 190% free before each test. This is with Mac OS X 10.1.4 on a dual 500 G4 with 832MB RAM. I'll upload and provide a link to the test page after I post this.

Mozilla 1.0rc1
15.25 sec
The app was responsive while rendering. Only for a brief moment did it throw up the colored spinning cursor in the middle of rendering. Scrolling with arrows is slow but page down/up is much faster.

OmniWeb 4.1beta4
28 sec
The app was responsive while rendering. Only for the last two seconds did it throw up the colored spinning cursor. Scrolling with arrows and page down/up is painfully slow. Scrolling even a single line seems to take a half to three quarters of a second. It's unbearable to try to scroll down the page with thee arrow keys. Note: the app froze with the spinning cursor after I closed the window with the test page! After I closed the first test and got the cursor, the browser returned to normal. After the second test, however, it crashed and I sent in a crash report.

Internet Explorer 5.1.4
10.75 sec
Gives spinning black & white and then colored cursor while loading, making the app completely unresponsive during that time. Scrolling with arrows and page down/up is very smooth and quick to respond. Scrolling is almost, care I say, snappy.

Navigator 0.2.1
8.25 sec
Gives spinning cursor while loading, making the app completely unresponsive during that time. Scrolling is fair and almost on par with Internet Explorer.

[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]

[starfleetX]

Okay, here's the test page:
http://brad.project-think.com/bigtestfile.html

[Demonhood]

this thread is getting kinda long. perhaps it's time to start fresh.
yes?

and just to be on topic, b4 has been very very crash-prone on my system. if the people at omnigroup want crash data, all i need ot do is run mine for a few minutes and you'll have plenty
b2 was fine. not sure why this one hates me.

[JLL]

Originally posted by starfleetX:
<STRONG>Okay, here's the test page:
http://brad.project-think.com/bigtestfile.html</STRONG>

WOW!

1m08 in OmniWeb, 0m13 in Mozilla 1.0.0rc1 and 0m16 in IE5.1.4

[cutterjohn]

Originally posted by starfleetX:
<STRONG>

[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</STRONG>

hmmm... I'll see about scraping it out into into my iDisk or something.
better: write a quick script(perl/python/ruby/applescript/whatever) to generate an HTML page containing a masive 2 column table with some dummy text. I bet that the results would be the similar(see below.)

I can watch OW step through resizing the table to fit the screen, ~3 or 4 steps, then spinning beach ball for about a minute which seems to block every other OW window as well, while in IE or Moz I can go off and load other pages local and external. Methinks that there is some serious thread blocking problems in OW relating to table rendering.

BTW: I also have plenty of RAM for what I was doing. I've 384M in the ibook, and also had radio userland 8.0.7, watson & terminal running leaving me ~118M free with OW running which is what I started initially.

[Brazuca]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
<STRONG>this thread is getting kinda long. perhaps it's time to start fresh.
yes?
</STRONG>

Hehe...maybe the forums can't handle this many pages?

I guess it makes sense so that new people can follow a thread. How often do you go back to page 17 to follow a discussion.

Should we name it: "size does matter"?

[cutterjohn]

Originally posted by starfleetX:
<STRONG>Okay, here's the test page:
http://brad.project-think.com/bigtestfile.html</STRONG>

ibook 500
Mozilla 0.99 CFM (milestone build) 15s
Mozilla 1.0rc01 CFM 16s (SLIGHTLY slower)
IE 5.1.4 18s
OW 4.1b4 1m34s
OW 4.0.6 2m, but theres nothing there when finished, if I stop it partway
through it does display something

(I've noticed this odd no display behavior on the 4.1bxs too. Load a page, and theres nothing there when finished, reload, and poof, the page.)

anyone tried opera, icab, or chimera?

Mozilla's still the memory hog champ out of the group: 60M real v. &gt;110M for IE AND OW

[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: cutterjohn ]

[ImpishLM]

Someone please remind me why OW is SO far behind other browsers Java-wise. I'm sure it's back there somewhere, but I really don't want to look through 23 pages to find it.

I play a Java-based multi-player game (RoboRunner) at www.eyeplaygames.com. The game board draws very slowly (it's almost instantaneous with IE 5.1), and fails to draw opponents's pieces altogether. Then, when I select a "chip," the board disappears altogether, and the chip I'm holding appears by itself in the center of the screen, as if I wanted to view an enlarged image.

I have to use MSIE to play the game.... and I hate it. I love OW in general, and have paid for it. But I'm not convinced by arguments I've read saying the Java problem is not the Omni Group's fault. Java's been around for quite some time, and so it's not like this is a new thing.

In case you couldn't tell, my patience is wearing thin. :-(

Originally posted by starfleetX:
<STRONG>Okay, here's the test page:
http://brad.project-think.com/bigtestfile.html</STRONG>

On a Dual-800 G4:

OW: 19 seconds
IE: 5 seconds
Navigator: 3 seconds

Ok...so the OW rendering engine needs work...but I'm still surprised that it brings normal webpages up faster than Navigator or IE on this computer. I can't even begin to imagine how fast it could get on normal webpages if the rendering engine was made fast.

[normyzo]

ABOUT CHIMERA/NAVIGATOR:

How much of the speed of Chimera/Navigator is due to the fact that its unfinished and doesn't have as large of a feature set? I mean, filtering images for ad-blocking, more sophisticated UI elements, etc have not been added to Chimera, and each takes a certain amount of processing power to maintain.

I don't think I'll trust chimera benchmarks until they are at 0.6 or 0.7 when more of the features are implemented. I can use it for some normal tasks, but it is INCOMPLETE!!!

[shortcipher]

Originally posted by normyzo:
<STRONG>ABOUT CHIMERA/NAVIGATOR:

How much of the speed of Chimera/Navigator is due to the fact that its unfinished and doesn't have as large of a feature set? I mean, filtering images for ad-blocking, more sophisticated UI elements, etc have not been added to Chimera, and each takes a certain amount of processing power to maintain.

I don't think I'll trust chimera benchmarks until they are at 0.6 or 0.7 when more of the features are implemented. I can use it for some normal tasks, but it is INCOMPLETE!!!</STRONG>

I dont imagine that it will slow down all that much, what would be the most cpu intensive thing it could do? Ad blocking might actually speed it up, as there will be less images to download, the bit of code required to block an ad doesnt need to be big or difficult or anything.

Strikes me that rendering the pages is the hard part, and theyve already done that.

[asxless]

Originally posted by shortcipher:
...Ad blocking might actually speed it up, as there will be less images to download, the bit of code required to block an ad doesnt need to be big or difficult or anything....

It certainly sppeds up Mozilla which loads the pages in this thread (on my TiBook 500) much faster than any other OS X native browser because I have turned off all of the images in people's sigs I also get to see more posts and less gratuitous graphics per screen full.

FWIW I know that I could do the same blocking in OW (and with more flexibility) but it just isn't as simple in OW as just right clikcing a graphic and selecting "Block images from this server".

BTW have you noticed that MacNN and other sites are now hosting the Ads so that Ad blocking by server is not nearly as effective as before

asxless in iLand

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by asxless:
<STRONG>
FWIW I know that I could do the same blocking in OW (and with more flexibility) but it just isn't as simple in OW as just right clikcing a graphic and selecting "Block images from this server".
</STRONG>

That's interesting...I hope Omni can add this feature to OmniWeb one day.

I just tried the test file in OmniWeb 4.1b4, IE 5.1.4, Chimera 0.2.1, and iCab (2.7? latest version, whatever it is).

iCab came out on top.

[Guy Incognito]

Originally posted by &lt;CheesePuff&gt;:
<STRONG>I just tried the test file in OmniWeb 4.1b4, IE 5.1.4, Chimera 0.2.1, and iCab (2.7? latest version, whatever it is).

iCab came out on top.</STRONG>

Doesn't really matter to me at the moment. The average webpage loads faster in OmniWeb than any other browser. It would be great if OW could load those &gt;500k web pages faster but, frankly, I'm satisfied with OW's speed on the non-extreme tests.

This is on a Dual-800...seems like other have a different experience with OW. I feel so spoiled.

[mrfrost]

Just a thought, when OW launches it shows the OW icon in the splash screen. The icon clearly shows North and South America.
Would/Could it be possible to show the various continents according to the localization you are using when you launch OW?

It's all in the details....

[Developer]

Originally posted by Mr_Frost:

<STRONG>It's all in the details....</STRONG>

While we are talking about details:

Did you notice that the proxy icon in OmniWeb disables whenever you open a menuling menu.
I find that distracing since the flashing proxy icon draws my attention away from the menuling menu.

ps:
Even more annoying: There is no check mark next to the active window in the window menu. That makes it really hard to decide which of the "MacNN Forums:" window is the current frontmost and which is not.


[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: Developer ]

[jason75]

OmniWeb 4.1sp68 v.383 is up.


[ 04-19-2002: Message edited by: jason75 ]