Fastest web browser

kilowatt

kilowatt

mach-o mach-o man
Ok, I know this sounds like another repeat thread.. but listen up folks, this is cool.

For the longest time, I thought OmniWeb was the best and fastest rendering web broswer for osx. I had tried IE, Mozilla/cfm builds, netscape, and icab.

Trust me folks, this is unbelievable.

I have found the gold at the end of the rainbow. This web site loads in less than a second. Its incredable.

Thank you, Admin, for the irc server.. had it not been for bl.b and gplex on irc, I never would have found this.

Found what? you say. hehehe just wait

Just you wait!!

Ok, here's the link, just download it and install it, pee first because if you don't, you will wet yourself when you see how fast this works.

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest/mozilla-macho-macosx-trunk.dmg.gz

once it decompresses, rename the result to .dmg (mine had some funny extention on it). Read the read-me file, and follow instructions. You will thank me later.


Mach-o Mach-o Man.. I'd like to be a Mach-o man.....
 
so you are going to use mozilla since it is fastest in your tests?

just understand you are helping to develop the next netrape/aol browsers and aid in creating a world where mac users are second class, money buys you nothing but trouble, users remain internet idiots and free upgrades will cost you more than you could imagine. if you get this, then have fun being a little bit faster.

:cool:
 
Dude, just download it. Mozilla isn't aol. netscape might be, but mozilla isn't.

This is the mach-o build, its nothing like its carbon-look-alike called Netscape, and nothing like the current popular Mozilla build.
 
It's a very quick browser, much better than Internet Explorer and quicker to render than OmniWeb.
It's very buggy though however and the widget set is gastly... Why oh why can't they use aqua for the widgets?? :)
 
They can't make it auqa-ish because mozilla uses themes, and apple has stated they don't look kindly on themes.

If the mozilla team could make a theme that looked nice (ie, wouldn't make macosx appear ugly to some people), and if it absolutely could not be used with the winblows version (and I doubt this would happen due to mozilla's open-source), then it could happen.

BTW, right click (control-click for you uni-button freaks ;-) ) on a link and choose 'open in new tab'

this feature ROCKS
 
Yeah, the Mach-0 builds of Mozilla definitely render the fastest of the bunch. Unfortunately, in just about every other area, it's lagging behind the Carbon build. Neither Netscape/Mozilla builds for OS X have Java yet, at least as far as I can tell, and without Java, they are kind of useless for me.

The sad part is the Mach-0 builds are looked upon as experimental, and won't get the attention that the Carbon builds will. That's unfortunate, because this build definitely has the rendering speed that no other browser on the Mac currently has - beta or otherwise.

As for the Aqua theme. Apple did put the kaybosh on someone developing an Aqua theme for Mozilla, but not for the suspected reasons. The theme developer wasn't following the Aqua guidelines and Apple wasn't too thrilled with it. If I were Apple, I'd assign some engineer there homework and have him create an Aqua theme for the Mozilla family.
 
Mozilla isn't aol. netscape might be, but mozilla isn't
Click to expand...

so where do you think netscape comes from, dude? mozilla is development phase of the netrape/aol browsers. i know they are 'independment' but their primary source of income is from netrape. check thru their whole site and read the fine print kilowatt. they are not innocent. they started working with netscape while netscape was still the independent cool browser it once was. but when aol took over netscape, thereby making it netrape, mozilla team just tagged along. so using mozilla is helping to develop netrape's next browser for free. again, read the fine print, users are the major developers of mozilla.

now i don't mind putting in my effort in helping admin make this a great site, but i am against helping a major rippoff company like aol perpetuate its hold on the naive market members at people like you and me's expense. like i said, if you understand what you are doing, go ahead and do it. i am not the one to make moral and ethical decisions for you. just be prepared to live with the consequences.
on the other hand if we spend our time and efforts trying to get the new independent browsers to work better, then we will benefit and so will they. as long as netrape/aol/mozilla/exploiter continue to hold the edge in browser use, the others will not be treated as competitors. sites will continue to require you to use the old standards rather than adding support for the indies. and the indies won't get enough support to survive.
just think about it. after you go back and read the small print on mozilla's site.
 
Errr....i couldnt get the file to work...
Mach-o build? What's a Mach-o build? Is it a underground version or something? I looked trough the mozilla.org page and I couldnt find any mach-o build. Just the 0.9.7 (Cocoa?) Mac OS X version. I downloaded it and tried it. These forums was very fast. Apple.com was very slow. Versiontracker.com again was fast. Some pages were very slow, some very fast.
 
Mozilla is an open source project that is commited to supporting standards. You're really off base when you suggest that because AOL/Time Warner provides the bulk of their funding that they are not building a standards based browser.

If the browser ever did get away from W3C standards license that the code is released under allows to code to be forked. In a nutshell, if AOL/Time Warner misbehaves then you can have the code. They can not pull a msft "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy because their code is free (as in freedom as well as in no cost).

If everybody uses a browser that supports open standards then it will always be possible to switch from one browser to another. If people use browsers that don't support open standards than developers will code specifically for them and before long, you won't be able to switch.

The bottom line is: Using Mozilla is a good thing, not a bad thing. Using Mozilla helps indies because it forces web developers to support w3c standards.

Vanguard

PS If you're interested, you can read the FAQ http://www.gerbilbox.com/newzilla/general/general03.php
 
Why can't just Apple make a good multi-platform browser, eh? :p

Sad but true, I'm using IE. Mozilla was, last time I tried it, waay slower than any other browsers I've tried on most pages, and looks like a blue-grey windoes hell. iCab, maybe, but it doesn't have the features IE has. Netscape, definealty not. Opera, yes, cool, and really fast, but they are WAY too slow on delvelopment of the OS X version, and releasing an OS 9 5.0 final version while the Carbon version shows something about the Opera team's mac knowledge. And WHY carbon? It's SLOWW! The OS 9 version is good, though, but I HATE banners, and I never use OS 9 :p

I'm currently using a good-looking, feature-rich browser.
As long as I don't pay for it, and it doesn't have ugly banners, it's OK to use M$ products ;)
If Apple comes on the browser market, though, I'll reconsider that ;)
 
Originally posted by ksv
As long as I don't pay for it, and it doesn't have ugly banners, it's OK to use M$ products ;)
Click to expand...

The trouble here is that msft doesn't support standards. If everybody uses their stuff then web site developers don't need to build sites that work on any browser. When that happens you will no longer have a choice of which broswer you can use, you will only be able to use IE.

If IE is the only browser that works, then msft has control of the internet. You can see them employ this strategy already. If you build pages with Microsoft Frontpage, other browsers will not work correctly. If you use their Java implementation, it only works on windows.

MSFT is tying you into windows by not supporting standards. Just because you don't pay for it, doesn't mean you're not helping them.

Vanguard

PS I don't mean to sound like I'm on my high horse. Although I keep trying to get away from it, I still use IE. Just recently I upgraded the latest milestone release of Mozilla (9.7) and it wouldn't post to this forum. Now I'm back to IE. Omniweb is too slow for giant web pages (I use /. all the time), and Opera didn't work for me either but I can't remember why. The next thing I'll try is milestone 9.8 of Mozilla. It comes out this month.
 
Originally posted by vanguard

If IE is the only browser that works, then msft has control of the internet. You can see them employ this strategy already. If you build pages with Microsoft Frontpage, other browsers will not work correctly. If you use their Java implementation, it only works on windows.
Click to expand...

I never said I liked M$ :p
But their browser (for mac) is, sad but true, the best (still it isn't good). It's too slow, and, as you said, they don't follow standards. That's hella annoying when making home pages, e.g, they look different in IE compared to other browsers. The win***s version doesn't even support QuickTime, urk.
 
Originally posted by ksv
And WHY carbon? It's SLOWW! The OS 9 version is good, though, but I HATE banners, and I never use OS 9 :p
Click to expand...

Opera will never be written in Cocoa, because then the whole app would have to be rewritten from Assembly. And Opera would never do that. The reason Opera has been ported to so many OS's is that they use the same codebase. And this is only possible in Carbon, I think.
 
Yep, I think we're coming to agreement. On a scale of 1 - 10 IE on the mac is a 5. That makes it the best thing out there. I'm still waiting for something better.

As for quicktime, I'm not sure why you say it isn't supported. I got the qt plugin and I use it all the time on windows.
 
For those of you who just couldn't download the mach-o build...

The Mach-o build just beats the daylights out of the standard cfm build which is what 99% of all mozilla/macosx users have used.

This build, the mach-o build is, as I understand it, mozilla compiled for macosx's unix, not just carbonated os9 mozilla. Folks, this is WAY faster than the .97 build. It renders the pages on this site in about half a second. The .97 build takes way too much time, I agree.

If AOL/Timewarrner wants to sponcer an open source project than so be it. I think most people here would perfer an open source standards compliant web browser over a closed source non-standard web browser created by microsoft.

microsoft =! AOL/TW (<> for you BASIC types, like me)

AOL has basically opened their IM protocals, sponsors Mozilla, and provides many Americans with basic internet access.

I'd never use AOL personally, and last time I had AOL (version 2.0 or something), it was really bad, but the point is that AOL doesn't use microsoft's competition-stifeling marketing schemes.

Folks, I hate to say a good thing about AOL (especially after watching all those "the all new 7.0" comercials where the people marvle that they can send "and recieve" email...), but AOL's a much better alternative to Microsoft.

Besides, didn't AOL sort of pull Netscape out of the ground when the Netscape people were filling for chapter 7?


TRY THE MACH-O BUILD. you will really like it. It is WAY faster than Netscape and the popular cfm/Mozilla builds.

Don't bash mozilla's web browser untill you try this one.
 
Wow! It is indeed faster then Internet Explorer and OmniWeb. I just wish it had a better interface. Something more OS X like.

Also, kinda wondering how they can copy Netscapes icons without getting in trouble.

Anyway, other then that it is a great browser!

Have a great day!

Albert
 
holy crap-o!

I just tried this and it blazes! Not only that, but you can also change themes without quitting and relaunching.

Oh yeah... Mozilla starts much faster and new windows open much faster as well...

it does have some cosmetic annoyances that Carbon Mozilla does not, but that's a small price to pay for that kind of speed!
 
Unforunately, the keyboard shortcuts don't work 90% of the time.

I wish they would concentrate on this build, other than the Carbon build, because it definitely shows more promise for speed and stability.
 
can't seem to get it to recognize plugins (Quicktime, Flash, WindowsMediaPlayer). I copied these in to the applications bundle folder "PlugIns", but none of them work. Can't seem to figure out where the application expects them.
 
Originally posted by kilowatt

microsoft =! AOL/TW (<> for you BASIC types, like me)

{content sniped}

TRY THE MACH-O BUILD. you will really like it. It is WAY faster than Netscape and the popular cfm/Mozilla builds.

Don't bash mozilla's web browser untill you try this one.
Click to expand...

A couple of things:

1. It's microsoft != AOL/TW. No big deal, just thought I'd get that corrected.
2. Where do I find the mach-o builds?
3. With regards to the not bashing thing, that's great advice. I wish more people on this board became educated before the became vocal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top