(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

One thing people forget to account for when saying "let the user add it" is that it will run faster if included in Puppy. Puppy loads pup_xxx.sfs into ram. It doesn't load the save-file into ram. So "after market" changes will never be as fast as the stock items. One solution is to remaster, but that's another thing to do.

If you ask me, that means having a "full" browser, such as SeaMonkey, Firefox, or Opera, is a better deal, since most people will be happy with whatever comes default and starts fast, so long as it handles whatever they throw at it.

It's the difference between being given something decent and the option to choose and being given very little and forced to choose.

On the other hand, if the space saved could be used to provide something more satisfying than having a nice browser by default, then go for it. Pass up a cookie for a pie, but don't give up the pie for a cookie. Unless it's a pie-sized cookie (either figuratively or literally).

I missed this..., -1 hv3 +1 Firefox :)

A size of a cookie depends on a point of view :) I just too lazy to download 70M using dial-up. Let barebones live!

opera.
around 10 megs (uncompressed) smaller than seamonkey suite yet it has more features. it's faster (in use), and can look/feel like moz or ie6 by simple customisation.

the tabbing model (MDI), session saving, zooming all page elements are just a few things which make firefox look like a poor contender

Can it be set to allow middle-clicking the home, back, and forward buttons to open them in a new tab? What about the same thing with bookmarks? Until that happens, I'm staying with Firefox. Especially since 2.0 has tabs that close on middle-click in Puppy (as Opera has had for some time). One thing that ticked me off in 2.0rc3 was that they hid the option to not resize images in about:config. That was somewhat stupid of them, but I can still change it, along with lowering the tab min width and moving the close button back to the right. After that it's very usable even with forty tabs (I'm 100% serious, and I didn't do it on purpose, I just opened all the new forum posts that I was interested in like I do any other day. I had missed a day though, so there were 2x as many). The arrow buttons are very handy too.

As for session saving, Firefox has that now. I don't care for it though. That's what bookmarks are for.

Not that I don't like Opera. I almost prefer it. I just hasn't quite outfoxed the Flaming One yet. And when it started catching up, Firefox was reborn like the Phoenix it once was into a superior form.

The fat lady still hasn't sung though, so we'll see what the future brings...

not sure, but opera practically invented 'mouse gestures' years ago so wouldnt be surprise if what you want is possible with a tweak. hold left button then click right btn will go to next page. i kinda like opera's keyboard navigation, again something you cant fully do in ff1 or ie6.

when firefox crashes you lose all the tabs (and their history) you were looking at on restarting. once you're used to sessions and resuming from where you left off it's hard to use another browser.

on windows ff 1.x had memory leaks and huge cpu usage - things may have changed now (I have to use ff 1.5 and ie6 at work for website testing)

The only bad points against opera that i can see are:
1. not open-source.
2. the odd poorly written site wont work properly (read that ms was sucessfully sued by opera for 10m when it was found to be intentionally sniffing for opera, cos it was scared). Enabling per-site 'identify as ie6' option usually fixes.

If one point of puppy is to obsess over lite-ness then opera wins hands down (by 5-6megs compressed).

From the poll there's no clear winner.
Maybe? have 4 isos every release: pup211-dillo.iso, pup211-firefox2.iso, pup211-opera902 etc...
If this isnt possible I'd prefer dillo as the std/only browser rahter than have a browser 'forced' on me

I vote for the SeaMonkey Suite stripped down as is (except with Profile Roaming Support and normal default font size)!

Firefox - preferably 1.5 for stability, but 2.0 will improve.

I like the flexibility to be able to use my own mail program in conjunction, and to load extensions that suit the way I work.

My current favourite extension is forecast fox; there's something intrinsically masochistic about knowing that it's 30 degrees Celcius outside and the sun is glistening on the water of the pool you spent the weekend cleaning, but you're stuck in a dark little study banging away on a computer.

Cheers

I used to use Firefox but tried Opera when I started using Puppy 2.10. Now I prefer it as I download alot of Dotpups and other files and I like the way it list them when downloading and thier progress.
it also allows the download of Widgets like chess and other small games you can play.
As anyone using it will have noticed it also shows a small picture of the websites you have opened when you hover your mouse over them on the top toolbar.
I have Puppy installed on my HD and also have firefox installed and no longer use it. When I do my next install of Puppy Firefox will be left out. Go Opera.

My vote is for Konqueror. I wonder if it would be possible to install Konqueror and the QT toolkit without the rest of the KDE destop. Would this allow for the use of KOffice? I don't know. I think so. . .

Todd

you can use mkkde to build a lightweight KDE with Konqueror.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... de&t=11876

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... de&t=11811

The resulting kde_2xx.sfs (kde_libs and kde_base) is around 70 MB.

Mark

Opera. They say it the fastest browser in the plaNET.

I'm agreeing with gliezl. On a low memory system, Opera runs far more smoothly than Seamonkey, probably due to allocating a lot less memory to start with. And that's one app with browser, mail client, torrent client, chat client all built in.

On this portable with 800x600 display I make extensive use of Opera's convenient page zoom function (+ and - keys).

Really, though, we need to build a special Puppy version of Firefox that dumps most of the unnecessary bloat....

I vote for Opera - because it is:-

* very fast;
* very configurable;
* easy to use;
* multi-tabbed;
* can be configured thru web page;
* font rendering is very good and can be configured;
* skinable;
* has inbuilt - mail client, torrent client, chat client;
* handles java & javascript well;
* separate javascript scripts can be easily added & used (easy to filter out unwanted muck on incoming web pages BEFORE it is rendered to screen) ..

Edited: forgot to mention -

* multiple panels - can be docked where user chooses;
* multiple toolbars - configurable;
* toolbar buttons - configurable ......

Have used it for many years in it's various incantations - the latest version v9.02 is very stable AND FREE ..

> Which Browser is Best for Puppy?

Whichever browser the user at the keyboard thinks is.

My vote is still with Dillo because it's just really fast. Of course I don't want to loose the ability to install firefox for browsing more bloated sites. Seamonkey would be my third choice.

peace,
James

John Doe wrote:> Which Browser is Best for Puppy?

Whichever browser the user at the keyboard thinks is.

Yeah, but informed decisions are based on facts, so the point of the thread is to gather facts and experience reports to base future decisions on.

My vote is still with Dillo because it's just really fast. Of course I don't want to loose the ability to install firefox for browsing more bloated sites. Seamonkey would be my third choice.

Firefox simply won't run on most older machines of the kind that Puppy is so great at revitalising. Sad, but true.

Dillo is a great start at making a browser, with absolutely no future. I say this as someone who reads the dillo-dev mailing list. Clue. Average traffic is about a message per month, normally saying "when is the next dillo coming out?""

If I could change my vote I'd move from Firefox to Swiftfox.

After the last couple of days experimenting with it, I like that it gives me most of Firefox v2.0 functionality but it's FAST.

I've moved all 3 of my Puppy installations to Swiftfox.

Don't know about how it goes on the older machines yet, ms2k. I'll try some of the real clunkers I've got in rebuild after Christmas and let you know. It's processor-specific so it won't be a short trial.

Cheers

marksouth2000 wrote:

John Doe wrote:> Which Browser is Best for Puppy?

Whichever browser the user at the keyboard thinks is.

Yeah, but informed decisions are based on facts, so the point of the thread is to gather facts and experience reports to base future decisions on.

So, I bumped it. You're welcome.

I've only used Firefox, Dillo, and SeaMonkey. Of those I prefer Firefox, but I feel it is more bloated than the ideal browser should be. This makes me very interested in Swiftfox (which I had not heard of before), but it cannot be the best browser for puppy because of its processor dependency. Hv3 sounds worth looking at, but Firefox is probably the best for most uses. Something else might be better for a specific puplett, though.
If you're going the "let them install what they want when they use puppy" approach, then Dillo is the best choice as a default because it is small and works well enough to keep people happy until they install their browser of choice.

SirDuncan wrote:I've only used Firefox, Dillo, and SeaMonkey.

....

but Firefox is probably the best for most uses.

...but you've never tried opera. give it a go

i suspect a lot of moz ppl have never given opera a chance yet say ff is the best. the only argument i can see for prefering a moz browser over opera is the open-source one. opera beats ff on virtually every count. i admit that ive not tried ff2 but i use ie6,ff1.5 and opera at work and here/witness the same old serious problems with ie and ff.

ff (when v1 was released) did a good marketing campain considering the product on offer. opera shoud've gone ad-free then (not 6? months later) i reckon the browser market would look a lot different today if opera had got its name about (iirc opera 4 yrs ago was better than ff1.5)