# Competition to Chimera out on Windows / Linux



## solrac (Sep 26, 2002)

It's called Phoenix

www.mozilla.org/projects/phoenix

It will not come out for OS X since it's pretty much the same as Chimera (Navigator).

BUT.... there's two really cool things it has that Chimera doesn't! (Which I just noticed with a few minutes use)

1) It has a close box for tabs (so you can close tabs with the mouse)
2) Under view, it not only has page SOURCE but page INFO as well, with several tabs, including a tab to list ALL links in the page, and tons of stuff!!

Also, it's .1 release and way more stable than chimera was at .1


----------



## toast (Sep 26, 2002)

Your link doesn't work at home. It's a pity, because phoenix looks great from what you say !


----------



## genghiscohen (Sep 26, 2002)

I wouldn't exactly call it "competiton" for Chimera.  They are both projects of the mozdev folks, after all.
Mozilla has the close-box for tabs, and I expect to see it implemented in Chimera before too long.  Probably the other features will make it into Chim, too.


----------



## 90X Double Side (Sep 26, 2002)

Hyatt always said that Chimera was the answer to the browser product for Macintosh, and that XUL would work on Windows and Linux if they would only make a browser-only product and rework the UI. He always pointed tot he m-b project, and Phoenix is clearly the successor to that idea.


----------



## solrac (Sep 26, 2002)

I edited my broken link, sorry 

here it is

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/phoenix/


----------



## toast (Sep 27, 2002)

Thanx for the new link, sol - any pictures of Phoenix available anywhere ? Just by curiosity, I'm almost sure it'll never be as nice as Chimera


----------



## verlorenengel (Sep 27, 2002)

Heh

Phoenix is stupid.

It's just mozilla, with a changed about box and the default theme set to orbit.. heh.

Icons are a little prettier but to me this looks like a bored 19 yearolds pet project, copy source from mozilla, change icons, add an extra feature thats invisible or two, release.

Sucker hasnt even changed the build name as it still claims itself to be mozilla.


----------



## Tigger (Sep 27, 2002)

> _Originally posted by verlorenengel _
> *
> Sucker hasnt even changed the build name as it still claims itself to be mozilla. *


Doesn't Chimera also claim to be Mozilla?

Anyway, what I always hate about Mozilla products is that don't have any cache: Even if you click on "View Source" it loads the page new from the Web! This is so stupid! If the page changed in the few seconds it takes to view the source, it might be a totally different page, so view source is useless!


----------



## nichrome (Sep 28, 2002)

Like it was pointed out earlier in this thread, this is not a matter of competition. The Mozilla project is about making a standards-compliant web user agent (Gecko) available on as many platforms as possible, applied in as many ways as possible.

Chimera is not available for anything but OS X, so it doesn't do a good job at delivering a browser-only Mozilla for the ever-hungry mob. This is where Phoenix comes in -- it's basically Chimera for W32 and Linux/the BSDs/etc. All the way down to Cocoa style customizable toolbars.

And bear in mind, the guy who started Chimera also started the Phoenix project. And that same guy now works at Apple. Dave Hyatt.


----------



## kendall (Oct 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by verlorenengel _
> *Heh
> 
> Phoenix is stupid.
> ...



You obviously never used the first release of Chimera.  It was a 16MB download that didn't even include the ability to download.  

Basically the author just slapped on a new face, gave the browser minimal functionality and left the rest of the Mozilla browser code there doing nothing.

It was slow and buggy and completely unusable.

After serveral releases the unused code was removed while functionality was improved.  Quartz rendering was probably the turning point for the project.  Now Chimera is an awesome browser and it's only half finished.

Phoenix on the other hand is quite functional for a .01 release.  It's basically what Chimera is to Mac but on Windows and Linux.
Plugins and download support are there, something Chimera didn't have on it's initial release and the download size is half that of Mozilla.

I don't really care for the theme but I think the author has the right idea.  It certainly has the potential to gain the popularity Chimera has on the Mac platform.


----------



## solrac (Oct 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *You obviously never used the first release of Chimera.  It was a 16MB download that didn't even include the ability to download.
> 
> Basically the author just slapped on a new face, gave the browser minimal functionality and left the rest of the Mozilla browser code there doing nothing.
> ...



Completely WRONG.
The first release of Chimera was very crippled, but it was an AWESOME, AMAZING, RIDICULOUSLY POWERFUL, INSANELY UNBELIEVABLE browser since day one. Why? Just ONE reason:

pages rendered almost as fast as windows.

Some pages that IE would take a whole minute to render (like message board threads with tons of pictures) would take chimera 3 seconds or less. Even if Chimera was a 200 MB download it would be well worth it.

And lastly, Phoenix will NEVER gain the popularity that Chimera has. Why? Because there is no need. Explorer is great and perfect and fine and dandy on Windows. Phoenix doesn't really offer anything new.

On the other hand, for the mac, Chimera offered a usable, ACTUALLY DECENT browsing experience. For Windows, Phoenix will just be a cool project. For mac, Chimera will be known as the great equalizer, one of the most important milestones ever for Mac OS X software.


----------



## jocknerd (Oct 2, 2002)

Galeon uses the gecko engine as well. It also uses the Gnome environment so its to Linux what Chimera is to OS X.

And its had close buttons on the tabs since it came out.


----------



## kendall (Oct 30, 2002)

> _Originally posted by solrac _
> *Completely WRONG.
> The first release of Chimera was very crippled, but it was an AWESOME, AMAZING, RIDICULOUSLY POWERFUL, INSANELY UNBELIEVABLE browser since day one. Why? Just ONE reason:
> 
> ...



http://slashdot.org/articles/02/10/30/051255.shtml?tid=154

I'd say after being featured on TechTV and Slashdot several times, Phoneix might just be a little more than a "cool project" and is shaping up to be the equivalent of what Chimera is but for Windows.

Anyway, not to say I told you so, but, I told you so! 

I guess it turns out, you were Completely WRONG! 

I can't help but love how a Mac user "knows" so much about what Windows users want. 

Ok, ok, I'm sorry but its just an annoying trend that this forum seems to   foster.  

Open-mindedness is king.


----------



## fryke (Oct 30, 2002)

Just installed Phoenix on both RedHat 8.0 and Windows 2000. It's the latest nightly builds for both OSs, so it's between 0.4 and 0.5.

Feels like a finished product from downloading to using. Much like Galeon on Linux, less like Chimera on Mac OS X.

So my new browser setup will look like this:

Mac OS X: OmniWeb 4.1.x
Windows 2000: Phoenix 0.x
Linux: Galeon

And I've got an iPod 10G now, because I was tired of preparing MiniDiscs for my everyday use. Why haven't you all told me how great iPod was? Oh, you did...


----------



## solrac (Oct 30, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *http://slashdot.org/articles/02/10/30/051255.shtml?tid=154
> 
> I'd say after being featured on TechTV and Slashdot several times, Phoneix might just be a little more than a "cool project" and is shaping up to be the equivalent of what Chimera is but for Windows.
> ...



what??

LOL

That was a link to a little slashdot message board with some geeks talking about Phoenix.

Phoenix is just a cool project. I stand my ground.

Chimera changes the web for EVERYONE on mac os x. From the super geek to a regular business person.

Chimera made web browsing usable on mac os x.

Chimera made web browsing "not a joke" on mac os x.

Chimera made web browsing not a migraine on os x.

What does Phoenix do? None of that.... yet it is still cool, but it's not an earth-shattering program.

Chimera is.


----------



## kendall (Oct 30, 2002)

What you're afraid to admit is that Phoenix has gained far more acceptance than you ever anticipated.  It has gotten far more publicity than Chimera for a mozilla based project and probably by this point has a larger install base as well.

Phoenix has just as much potential in Linux and Windows as Chimera has for OS X.

What you also fail to realize is that people want an alternative to IE.  IE, as stable as it may be in Windows, is still terribly exploitable on the web.  I'd say without Mozilla or other browsers based on it, web browsing in Windows would be a joke.


----------



## solrac (Oct 30, 2002)

Actually, I have no fear of admitting anything about Phoenix. Of course it has a larger install base! Mac has only 5% of the market. If only 1% of windows users downloaded Phoenix there would be more installations of that than Chimera on 99% of macs. (A little exaggerated but you get the point.)

So true, Phoenix offers an alternative. But that only makes browsing on windows more "fun" or more "anti-microsoft". It doesn't really offer anything Explorer doesn't have, except popup-blocking.

Phoenix is no more stable than Explorer.
Phoenix is no more faster than Explorer.

Phoenix is cool, though. It has tabbed browsing and popup blocking and all that jazz.

On mac though, web browsing was unusable. Sad. Pathetic. Chimera made web browsing USABLE. That's all I'm saying.

I'm just saying Chimera improved Mac web browsing by eleventy-billion squared, and Phoenix only improves windows browsing by threefold, or so.


----------



## Tigger (Oct 31, 2002)

I personally would say Chimera is also just a cool project, nothing more.
It didn't do anything of that for me you are telling.
On my setup, it isn't any faster than IE. It doesn't render any pages prettier for me. Maybe the server gives me an other version of Chimera than everyone else. 
I don't know, cause people always tell me something like it is the Über-Browser.


----------



## solrac (Oct 31, 2002)

Tigger, what kind of mac do you have?

If you have a dual G4 1.25 Ghz, maybe Chimera is just as fast as Explorer.

I go to pages with tons of pictures on them that Explorer takes OVER a minute to load and display.

The same page on Chimera takes THREE SECONDS.

Chimera renders every page faster.

Chimera doesn't redraw HTML code that doesn't change. In Explorer, if you delete a message in hotmail, the whole page redraws and the message is gone. In Chimera, you would just see the message disappear without the page redrawing.

Tigger, are you sure you're on a mac?


----------



## boi (Oct 31, 2002)

direct from the mouth of the developers of phoenix:
13. Where's the mac version?

There is no mac version. While Phoenix could be made to run on Mac without much trouble, we see no point in competing with Chimera. Chimera is the lightweight, standalone Mozilla browser solution for Mac OS X. We have received requests for a Mac classic version, and are considering the idea. But don't hold your breath.



anyway...

http://www.kmgerich.com/misc.html

phoenix for mac os x.


----------



## fryke (Nov 1, 2002)

I have to agree with Tigger, solrac: Chimera didn't do any such thing for me. But not because it was bad or anything, only because I already HAD decent browsing experience. I'm using OmniWeb for everything except 1%, because I'm much faster with it. Depends on your browsing habits, I guess, but keyboard shortcuts just rock for me. That I can enter 'vt chimera' to find the newest version of Chimera on Versiontracker, for example, or that 'mx' takes me here to macosx.com/forums. Plus: Page rendering isn't that far behind there. And for everything else I'm using IE, as it's the most compatible browser for sites that don't work in OW.

But those are personal opinions that I only put here because you're statement that sounds so absolute... It just _isn't_ that absolute.


----------



## kendall (Nov 1, 2002)

I used to like Netscape when you could type "quote aapl" and get a specific stock quote.

For some reason they've removed that feature in Mozilla.  Quite a shame.

The newest version of IE for OS X actually improves quite a bit upon the original.  Its not that bad of a browser either.


----------



## solrac (Nov 1, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *I have to agree with Tigger, solrac: Chimera didn't do any such thing for me. But not because it was bad or anything, only because I already HAD decent browsing experience. I'm using OmniWeb for everything except 1%, because I'm much faster with it. Depends on your browsing habits, I guess, but keyboard shortcuts just rock for me. That I can enter 'vt chimera' to find the newest version of Chimera on Versiontracker, for example, or that 'mx' takes me here to macosx.com/forums. Plus: Page rendering isn't that far behind there. And for everything else I'm using IE, as it's the most compatible browser for sites that don't work in OW.
> 
> But those are personal opinions that I only put here because you're statement that sounds so absolute... It just _isn't_ that absolute. *



You are absolutely wrong. Especially if your computer is a Powerbook G4 500. Chimera is insanely faster than Explorer, and Omniweb, and Opera, and iCab, and every other browser.

You and Tigger simply either don't notice it, don't care, or can't see it.

Like I said. Explorer would take over A MINUTE to load a page. Chimera takes 3 seconds. Any other web browser refreshes the whole screen (including on Windows!) if only a piece of HTML changes. Chimera only redraws that part of the screen.

These are absolute facts. Bring your computer to my house in Southern California if it's not true on your computer. I would love to fall out of my seat.

Chimera changes browsing on the mac forever.


----------



## plastic (Nov 1, 2002)

I just scrapped IE on my PC and used Netscape 7 which is also a Moz app. And it rocks. No more crashes.


----------



## kendall (Nov 1, 2002)

solrac got me thinking about some catchy Chimera slogans.

"Chimera changes browsing on the mac forever."

"Chimera, clinically proven to regrow hair!"

"Chimera, less than one calorie per serving."

"I love what you do for me, Chimera!"

"Always Chimera." 

**edit** 

Hit submit thinking my browser had crashed.

Honestly though, Chimera really wasn't that usable until their .30 release and even then plugin support sucked and downloading was virtually impossible.

I always kept wondering how are they going to get people to stick with this project when you can't even download.    

It certainly didn't change my life when I first used it and I'm gussing solrac wasn't there during its humble beginings.

Please, someone download the first released Chimera build and tell me how great it is.  It really didn't "change browsing on the mac forver" until about six months after its first release and even that statement is highly debatable.

**edit**


----------



## Javintosh (Nov 2, 2002)

I think a lot of people see potential more than what's actually there. Chimera did not anything for me until .4. However, from the first version I could see what other people see in it.


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *It certainly didn't change my life when I first used it and I'm gussing solrac wasn't there during its humble beginings.
> 
> Please, someone download the first released Chimera build and tell me how great it is.  It really didn't "change browsing on the mac forver" until about six months after its first release and even that statement is highly debatable.
> ...



Wrong!!!

I downloaded Chimera 0.13 when it first came out, and within 1 day, I was claiming that it was the future of web browsing on the mac.

I was raving about chimera madly since 0.13.

Everything I said about Chimera has been true since 0.13. 1000x faster than Explorer or any other browser. Instant rendering. Only redraws portions of the screen that change. Not even Mozilla can touch it.

This was all true since 0.1.3

I don't care that it couldn't download. The point was, it made web browsing BEARABLE.

Chimera 0.1.3 was an engine with no car. A powerful, sleek, ultimate engine. And they're building their product around it.

Just like Mac OS X beta. Mac OS X beta to Mac OS 9 is an EXACT PERFECT analogy to Chimera 0.1.3 to Explorer 5. Mac OS X Beta was flawed and didn't have everything and was missing stuff, but compared to Mac OS 9 it was GOD. It didn't crash. It could multi-task. That's it. PERIOD. PERFECTION. All the polishing was just built around it. Chimera 0.1.3 compared to ANY other browser was GOD. It renders pages instantly popping them on screen almost as fast as a Windows box. That's it. PERFECTION. The download dialog, buttons, preferences are all just polishing being built around its perfect amazing engine that worked flawlessly since 0.1.3

I still have that release; I'm saving it as a collector's item.


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

It's an opinion thing, solrac. For example, I'm typing this now in Chimera. I'm typing 'somekindofblue' on 'white'. I almost can't read what I'm typing, and I don't like it. It reduces my productivity. I'm not saying Chimera is all bad. I agree that its page buildup speed is phenomenal. Only: I don't care that much about it. I'm aware of that this also is an opinion thing. I only stated that while Chimera might have changed browsing for you personally forever, it hasn't for me, personally. It was OmniWeb that did that for me. Accept that your statement, as absolutely as you put it, is wrong. That's all I'm saying.

Btw. I'd love to come out to you to Southern California, but I don't have money or time right now for vacation. 

I'm saving for either a new iBook or PowerBook I'm going to buy sometime next year. Now i'm going back to OmniWeb, where I can type in black on white instead of brightblue on white.


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

I love lynx because of the built-in popup blocker.

It certainly changed the way I browsed the internet. 

tehehehe


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

fryke,

The light blue text on white is a CSS setting on macosx.com. If you try typing into text fields on other web sites, the text will be black. It's only light blue here at macosx.com

Omniweb is ignoring the light blue text. Omniweb is doing wrong.

If you try Explorer on mac, Phoenix on windows, Exporer on Windows, etc., they all have light blue text here.

Of course, they all have a dark blue background too.

Chimera is ignoring the dark blue background. Hopefully they fix that in the next release. But it's closer than Omniweb!! (Omniweb is completely ignoring the styles.)

Lastly, I don't even type in the text boxes. I use TextEdit. That way if the power goes out I don't lose what I'm typing, and Text Edit won't crash either!! Then I just paste into the text box.

Fryke, everything I said is absolute fact, not opinion. You even agreed with me. You just said you agree that page rendering is phenomenal in Chimera. It is. It's a fact.

The opinion is that it changes browsing on the mac. For me, it did. My Windows friends could no longer point and laugh at me about web browsing when I got Chimera.

But it is absolute fact that since 0.1.3, page rendering was extremely phenomenal, redrawing was intelligent, and it renders wayyy faster than ANY other browser on the mac. I challenge anyone.


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

Can't you just accept that it HAS NOT changed browsing for me and others, and that therefore you shouldn't put your statement that absolute? Yes, speed is different. But speed is always an ambiguous thing. OmniWeb has great autocomplete (better than any other browser) and has changed webbrowsing for me forever. Chimera has none of that.

See, there are four or five features of OmniWeb that changed webbrowsing for me forever. And going Chimera was and is a step back from that.


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

I'm not saying it changed browsing for you forever.

I'm saying (and you can NOT argue) that:

Page rendering speed is PHENOMENAL. (You agreed with this.) It is faster at displaying pages than any other browser. Omniweb and all others are a joke compared to it.

However...
If you personally don't care about the speed of the page rendering, then of course it makes no difference to you.

The features you love in Omniweb are irrelevant in this topic. I'm talking about an ENGINE. Chimera is the best engine EVER for rendering pages.

The features you talk about in Omniweb are like Spring Loaded Folders in Mac OS 9, versus none in Mac OS X pre 10.2. People were complaining. "I love my spring loaded folders!" But the ENGINE was the OS, the uncrashable, stable, multi-tasking OS. Spring Loaded Folders and tons of other little features don't mean crap compared to that. Those features can be built on top of the new engine (and has, as you can see in Jaguar).

Chimera is the ultimate browsing engine today, and Omniweb should license it. Omniweb's features should be built on top of Chimera and Omniweb would suck.

The features are simple. It's the ENGINE that matters.

But of course, if you personally don't care about that speed, then the engine is useless to you.


----------



## kendall (Nov 2, 2002)

Page rendering is absolutely worthless if the browser is completely unstable which the first releases of Chimera were.


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by itanium _
> *Page rendering is absolutely worthless if the browser is completely unstable which the first releases of Chimera were. *



Wrong.

When Chimera first came out I used it as a companion to Explorer.

I'd do everything I possibly could in Chimera, and when I came across a limitation, I'd copy and paste the URL in Explorer.

This STILL saved me TONS of time over Explorer's piece of *deleted by Ed Spruiell* rendering.

These days I use Chimera (Navigator) 100% of the time EXCEPT FOR ONE THING

GRRR....
If I want to get the URL of an image on an HTML page there's no way!!! I have to paste the URL into explorer, then right-click on the image and "open image in new window". There's no way to do this in Chimera yet.

I wait for the day I can delete Explorer just like I waited for the day that I could delete Mac OS 9.


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

Guess we're settled now. 

You're much more interested in speed (the engine), I'm much more interested in features (the GUI, although I browse 'headless', only with keyboard shortcuts, but that's UI all the same).

You're right, I guess we would have no problems agreeing on a combination of Chimera's speed and OmniWeb's features.

But I guess we're going to disagree on the following: I think the finishing touches of a UI are not 10% important but 50% or more.

Also, while I agree 100% that OW's engine is displaying pages much too slow (and OmniGroup agrees here, too), there are other things in the engine that are very, very good. But they're, well, UI things again.

For example, text behaves like text in OW. You can triple click a paragraph to select the paragraph, which might be more important to me than anybody else, because I'm handling a literature platform, but that's only an example. Chimera, on the other hand, uses a Mozilla/Carbon/Cocoa mix that doesn't feel healthy to me.

OmniGroup is very good at everything UI. So what I'm really hoping for is that we'll get our hands on OmniWeb 5 sneaky peeks as soon as possible, to see whether that engine (which will be a completely overhauled engine, not based on Mozilla, which I think is good, because there already ARE enough Mozilla-based browsers with Chimera and Mozilla) will be what OW users were craving for, really.

But that's future talk. If we look at the current state of builds, we can agree that Chimera is the fastest browser on the Mac, and OmniWeb is the most useable. I'm glad there's competition. It'll finally bring browsing into the 21st century (I personally think it's not there yet, even on Windows).


----------



## solrac (Nov 2, 2002)

Remember, UI things are never part of the engine. UI is built on top of an engine.

It's the engine that makes it all worth it, but it's the UI that sells.

I think Chimera is ahead of the game, because all they have to do is tweak the UI to perfect it.

While Omniweb has to OVERHAUL the whole engine... see what I mean?

Also, I think Chimera is using Cocoa very well. It looks really healthy to me now! There's no Carbon actually. It's a mix between Cocoa and a XUL backend (or something like that). It is a cocoa app, and ... I don't know... but when I triple click in here I get the whole line... both in the text box and in the web page!!


----------



## fryke (Nov 2, 2002)

Paragraph. Like in TextEdit. Not line.

And the emphasis you put on the engine vs. the UI is just that. An emphasis. I tell you, you'd hate a car with a good engine and seven levers to steer it.


----------



## boi (Nov 3, 2002)

i wish there were a browser that didn't ignore certain CSS things like scroll bar and button changes other than IE. even IE doesn't change the scroll bar. it really kinda sucks for us web developers. i have to fire up virtual PC to see how a page will look to everyone else. i just hope chimera allows an option in the future to turn CSS recognition on/off. i don't think the browser should offer its take on what the web site /should/ look like. what a pain. 

anyway, that said, i use chimera all the time. chimera over mozilla because it's a bit snappier and it actually allows me to check my bank balance (for some reason, mozilla won't let me). chimera over explorer because it's prettier and more compact. i wish it didn't crash, but it's still a .4 release. the fact that /anyone/ uses it over IE 5.2 should prove it is something special.


----------



## GroundZeroX (Nov 3, 2002)

Pheonix isn't just Mozilla with a different about box, and icons. Mozilla was written to let you do HTML editing using  WYSIWYG tools, as well as go on chat (either on AIM or IRC), do e-mail, among other things. Pheonix is just a straight web browser. It doens't have all the extra overhead.


----------



## solrac (Nov 3, 2002)

Boi, Chimera is at 0.5, not 0.4

And Fryke, the car with 7 levers is a bad analogy. Chimera is more like a stripped Ferrari with only a wheel, brake, accelerator, shifter, and that's it.

Explorer (or any other web browser) is like a Pinto-Yugo with power windows and locks and A/C and reclining seats.

Much easier to add those to the Ferrari than it is to get the Ferrari engine in the Pinto. And the Ferrarri is wayyyyy cooler and faster anyway. ;-)


----------



## fryke (Nov 3, 2002)

Okay, but besides bad analogies, you might agree that only few companies are really good at interface design. Apple is one of them, OmniGroup is one of them. Microsoft has shown for years that the task of creating innovative and yet intuitive interfaces is quite a big part of the equation.

Maybe to put it into an analogy that's easier to grasp, you might agree that all the speed of a car isn't worth much, if its handling isn't suited to the needs of the driver.

But to put the thread a _little_ back on track: I think Phoenix is a good thing for the Windows world, because it brings a fast and clean interface that fits the Windows look & feel to an engine (Gecko) that's quite a bit safer than IE. And I guess it would be good for organisations to make use of Phoenix instead of IE, and to use a different mail application than Outlook or Outlook Express. Most of Microsoft's security issues are with either IE  or their E-Mail applications (viruses, worms etc.).

Maybe, if Microsoft had left the browser and E-Mail market to its competitors, MS's security issues wouldn't be that big. Maybe it would have been easier to fight off even Linux that way (or the Mac). But then again, without IE, there would have been much less progress in web browsers, and we wouldn't even be _talking_ about alternatives, as Netscape 3 would still be our worst and best choice at the same time. Reminds me of 'The Fifth Element', where Gary Oldman destroys a glass to show how destruction means activity and therefore jobs and evolution.

I'm getting all philosophical now, so I better end this already too long post.


----------



## solrac (Nov 3, 2002)

True, but, Navigator uses a simple Cocoa Interfact, which was developed by Apple, right?

Every decent Mac OS X program is basically an Apple interface, right? Just that developers can move Apple's pieces around however they like.

Notwithstanding, I can't WAIT for Navigator (Chimera) to hit version 1.0........ *Drooool*


----------



## glassfish (Dec 27, 2002)

Perfect example for you.. compare the speeds of loading the following site with Explorer and Chimera... Chimera ROCKS!!!

http://www.ownerbuilderbook.com

Try it... you'll stay as far from Explorer as you can...


----------



## iscaro (Dec 27, 2002)

Well...  just bought a new eMac a month ago... now I'm at OS X 10.2.3 and Chimera 0.6 (latest build out)...

It really works ok!!!  And I'm using it right now to write... black on white... and fast!!!

Works for almost all sites! Just have little stupid problems with a couple, but I don't care...

Chimera really works... and is ok... can't wait to see how 1.0 will be or have...

Try it... the latest one is much better for me!!!


Ciao


----------

