Slimjet web browser

[OscarTalks]

The videos on that website did play for me in latest Slimjet (11.0.5.0).
I don't know if it makes a difference but Slimjet ships with a slightly older Pepper Flash and I have updated that to latest (which is 22.0.0.209) and I believe some websites refuse to play if the Flash Player version is outdated.

Regarding the other issue,
There is an option in the settings which talks about memory optimisation. To be honest I don't fully understand what it does but you could try experimenting with it to see if you can improve the performance under heavy load.

[davids45]

G'dafternoon Mike,

I think you meant to type a colon but came up with a half-measure in your last post for me?

I succeeded with:

slimjet://plugins

As Daddy Pig is wont to say, 'I'm a bit of an expert in typos' so I should be careful not to be seen to be "throwing stones".

Thanks,

David S.

[OscarTalks]

Version 11.0.6.0 released.
This is supposed to have fixed a bug which prevents videos on Twitter from playing.
Not sure if it is working though, I am still seeing error messages, though they are different from before.
To be honest I am finding Vivaldi better in this regard.
https://yadi.sk/d/fd8rBM0WoF9sB

[OscarTalks]

Slimjet version 11.0.6.0 has been recalled.
The download page has reverted back to 11.0.5.0
Reports have suggested that the fix of Twitter videos broke playback of videos on some other sites including Facebook.
In the brief tests I performed, the Twitter videos still did not appear to work in Puppy anyway, not sure why.
They are working to release 11.0.7.0 as soon as possible (and possibly a version 12 based on a newer Chromium).
In the meantime, users may wish to consider NOT upgrading to 11.0.6.0

[OscarTalks]

Version 11.0.7.0 is out.
Videos in Twitter still don't appear to play. Nor do streams in Periscope.
These appear fine in Vivaldi and also Iron so not sure why the problem with Slimjet. Shame because I like the browser otherwise. Maybe they have tested the fix in Windows only. Some reports are suggesting a problem with Pepper Flash 23 but that might be Windows related as well because it seems OK in Puppy in my tests.

[OscarTalks]

Slimjet version 12.0.5.0 based on Chromium 53.0.2785.89 is out.
Now requires --no-sandbox argument in older Puppies (same as Vivaldi 1.4).
Adequate sandboxing in Tahr. Use "tahr" version in Slacko 6.3.* to run with sandbox enabled.
I think the video problem in Twitter and Periscope is due to lack of h264 codec because of licensing issues. Not sure why other browsers have it working
Experimental packages uploaded, but I am considering stopping doing this.
Includes Pepper Flash 23.0.0.185
https://yadi.sk/d/fd8rBM0WoF9sB

[sheldonisaac]

If you want to move the entire window (not maximised) you should be able to do the usual of hold down the Alt key and then left-click and drag anywhere in the window to move the whole thing.

Also if it helps you can put the normal JWM window borders around it from within the Settings by ticking "Use system title bar and borders".

OscarTalks, thank you! I got version 12.0.4.0 sfs from your link yesterday, and like it a lot. Under Slim Slacko 6.

But what will I do if you stop doing this!!??


Sheldon

[OscarTalks]

Version 12.0.6.0 now out.
Seems they are releasing bugfixes every couple of days just lately.
I have updated my experimental packages.
https://yadi.sk/d/fd8rBM0WoF9sB

@Sheldon and anyone else,
Mike Walsh is also putting packages together for Slimjet
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=106957
I am tending to use Vivaldi more as my Chromium derivative of choice but have not completely abandoned Slimjet yet.

[Mike Walsh]

Hi, Sheldon.

But what will I do if you stop doing this!!??

As Oscar says, look here.

My 12.0.6.0 packages have just been released in the last half-hour. I'm posting from it in Tahr64 now.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 692#929692

The Puppy maxim has always been one of choice. The main difference with mine is that they reside in /opt (same as Chrome). rather than /usr/lib. Apart from that, it's the same browser.....and works just the same. Just packaged in a different way, that's all.

My inspiration came from Oscar originally; I have him to thank for my interest in SlimJet in the first place. It's taken over from Chrome for me in the 32-bitzers, since Google dropped support for 32-bit Chrome back in April.

It does everything Chrome can.....and then some..!


Mike.

[OscarTalks]

Slimjet website is now offering 13.0.0.0 as a "beta".
Based on Chromium 55 with PepperFlash 24.0.0.194 bundled.
MEDIA CODEC SUPPORT appears to be improved.
Videos on Twitter and Periscope are playing.
Experimental 32bit packages uploaded.
Running OK in Wheezy and Slacko 5.7
https://yadi.sk/d/fd8rBM0WoF9sB

[greengeek]

Slimjet website is now offering 13.0.0.0 as a "beta"...
https://yadi.sk/d/fd8rBM0WoF9sB

Hi OscarTalks - thanks very much for this. Just tried the Slacko version on my Slacko 5.6 derivative and it works perfectly so far - including pepperflash. Very grateful for your continued efforts at bringing capable browsers into puppydom.

I like to stick with the oldest, most lightweight browsers that I can, but for some purposes there is no substitute for recent offerings. Your versions just seem to work perfectly for me. Real timesaver.

Thanks!

[duckguy]

Hi, I'm posting this from Slimboat.

When I first loaded the 32bit version of Tahrpup 6.05 the quickpet manager came with Slimboat. When I tried to update Slimboat, the site told me to just switch to Slimjet.

Newsflash. Slimjet won't run on the latest 32 bit version of Tahrpup! Good news, though. I have the 64 bit version of Tahrpup, and it runs just fine. The only thing is that the 64 bit Tahrpup is too buggy and crashes frequently!

My advice is to stick to the 32 bit version, and stick to Slimboat, until they come up with a more stable version of either the 64 bit Puppy, or a Slimjet that won't crash with the 32 bit Puppy.

Hope this helps. B"H.

[Mike Walsh]

Hi, duckguy.

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask? The 32-bit versions that both Oscar and I do for Puppy run without any problems...

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.


Mike.

[duckguy]

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mike, I was using slimjet-12.0.11.0-tahr.pet, but it will not load. Good news though, I found a later vesion (that loaded) here: http://www.mediafire.com/file/7n0opd8xp ... tahr.pet#!

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, in Tahr64, the touch pad never configures properly. The settings must be reconfigured every time the system reboots. Also the memory frequently clogs with data overflow and then the system freezes, which requires the user to do a hard reset of the system. I almost never shut down Tahr64 normally - because it locks up so frequently. I really like its speed and smoothness but it's unstable (at least the configuration that I have).

By the way, thank you for replying so astutely and with such alacrity! B"H.

[duckguy]

Hi trying to reply but it's not loading up!!! B"H.

Hi, duckguy.

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask? The 32-bit versions that both Oscar and I do for Puppy run without any problems...

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.


Mike.

[duckguy]

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mike, I was using slimjet-12.0.11.0-tahr.pet, but it will not load. Good news though, I found a later vesion (that loaded) here: http://www.mediafire.com/file/7n0opd8xp ... tahr.pet#!

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, in Tahr64, the touch pad never configures properly. The settings must be reconfigured every time the system reboots. Also the memory frequently clogs with data overflow and then the system freezes, which requires the user to do a hard reset of the system. I almost never shut down Tahr64 normally - because it locks up so frequently. I really like its speed and smoothness but it's unstable (at least the configuration that I have).

By the way, thank you for replying so astutely and with such alacrity! B"H.

Hi, duckguy.

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask? The 32-bit versions that both Oscar and I do for Puppy run without any problems...

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.


Mike.

[duckguy]

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mike, I was using slimjet-12.0.11.0-tahr.pet, but it will not load. Good news though, I found a later vesion (that loaded) here: http://www.mediafire.com/file/7n0opd8xp ... 6-tahr.pet#! ... this updated version is loaded and running.

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all, in Tahr64, the touch pad never configures properly. The settings must be reconfigured every time the system reboots. Also the memory frequently clogs with data overflow and then the system freezes, which requires the user to do a hard reset of the system. I almost never shut down Tahr64 normally - because it locks up so frequently. Also, the screensaver never comes on, no matter how many times it's configured. The computer's sleep mode locks up Tahr64, requiring a hard reboot (yet in Tahr32 both sleep mode and screensaver work smoothly on the exact same hardware). Also, I do have the 32-bit compatibility mode utility installed. Tahrpup64 is buggy though. I really like its speed and smoothness but it's unstable (at least the configuration that I have).

By the way, thank you for replying so astutely and with such alacrity! Sorry to take so long to reply. I replied before, but the message board just shows my reply as a blank entry. B"H.

Hi, duckguy.

Curious. Where are you getting your SlimJet from, may I ask? The 32-bit versions that both Oscar and I do for Puppy run without any problems...

I also don't understand why your copy of Tahr64 is 'buggy', and 'crashes frequently'. My own is as stable as they come; it's where I package the 64-bit versions of SlimJet.....and they run just fine.


Mike.

[Mike Walsh]

Ah, well; as long as it's now up-and-running, that's all good.

Looks like one of mine; Oscar uses Yandex, AFAIK (after copy.com went under last year).

We do what we can to ensure maximum compatibility, but sometimes it's simply down to how much customising the individual has done with their system, or the particular combination of hardware.

The Chromium-based browsers all seem to rely, to a greater or lesser degree, on a number of the libs to be found in the FireFox directory, in /usr/lib. If you'd been using the version to be found in QuickPet, then I believe PhilB, when he was developing and building the Tahrs, mainly took many applications from their respective websites and did a direct .pet conversion on them. He wouldn't have had time to go through all the launcher scripts for every single one of them.....and the Chromium-based browsers have an enormous list of available command-line 'switches' which can be applied to the exec-line in the launcher scripts. Have a look here, if you don't believe me:-

http://peter.sh/experiments/chromium-co ... -switches/

There's well over a thousand individual commands there.....and the potential number of combinations is mind-boggling, to say the least!

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

I must confess, several of those problems you mention there are peculiar to laptops; like the touchpad, and the 'sleep' function.....stuff like that. My 64-bit machine is a BIG old Compaq business-class desktop PC, from around 12-13 years ago. My laptop is an even older Dell, from 2002.....with a P4, no less.

Still runs a lot of the modern Pups, though..!


Mike.

[duckguy]

Ah, well; as long as it's now up-and-running, that's all good.
Looks like one of mine; ...
I must confess, several of those problems you mention there are peculiar to laptops; like the touchpad, and the 'sleep' function.....stuff like that. ... Mike.

OK! I am running two laptops, that's true. One old Toshiba with a dual core AMD chip, and a slightly newer HP with a dual core Intel chip. Both are around ten years old. Both have the same issues with Tahr64, touchpad, screensaver, memory clogging. The Toshiba is maxed on RAM, but the HP still could take another 2GB. I found Tahr64 to be smoother on both. Tahr32 is rock solid on them though. There is almost nothing that can crash it and all the functions of the laptops work with no struggles.

Maybe I need a desktop like yours. Thanks for your help! B"H.

[Mike Walsh]

Interesting you should say that.

I, too, find the 64-bit Pups to be somewhat 'smoother' in their operation.....yet still prefer the 32-bit Pups, simply due to their blistering speed..!

And you're right about 32-bit Tahr 6.05 as well. It was the very first Pup I'd found, over two years ago, that simply 'worked' on ye ancient Dell, OOTB, without the need for any funny 'workarounds'. The Dell uses the Intel 'Extreme' graphics adapter, which for long enough has been acknowledged by many to be nothing more (& nothing less) than a king-sized PITA to use under Linux.

Works perfectly under XP, of course.....and yet, to give Intel their due, when you do discover how to get it working under Linux, it still gives (even after almost 15 years) a razor-sharp, crystal-clear picture. There's nothing wrong with its operation, yet it's the sort of 'tiffling-about' that puts many newcomers to Linux right off their stroke..!

Tahr 6.05 is by far the most 'stable' of the recent generation of Pups.....which is why I've never had the slightest hesitation in recommending it. To anybody.

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

Maybe I need a desktop like yours.

Hah! The old girl was rescued from an ignominious trip to the dump nearly 3 years ago; my sister had just bought a new one pre-loaded with Win 7, 'cos XP was at EOL. I took it off her hands; my bro donated a 15" Dell monitor; he'd just quit using Windows, and treated himself to a top-of-the-range iMac, with the 34" Retina display.....and the keyboard, mouse, peripherals, etc., I'd got already. It's had a lot of upgrading; it was a top-end machine for its time, although outfitted with a 'basic' spec.

Lots of room for maneouvre!


Mike.