Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

dillo-browser.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 179 posts

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#71

Post by tentacleuno »

bluedino wrote: post #54
rodarima wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I used to use dillo on my main desktop too, for browsing documentation that wasn't too heavy on CSS - having 20 to 40 tabs open would gobble up a lot of RAM in Firefox, whereas dillo happily stayed around 100MB no matter what I threw at it. My current desktop has enough RAM this not a concern any more, but I have fond memories of using dillo on memory-deficient machines and am a current user still. This is precisel…

>> I used to use dillo on my main desktop too, for browsing documentation that wasn't too heavy on CSS Hah! I used an old Dell laptop that had a 1400x1050 (?) screen for this exact purpose with Dillo. I was so mad that software stopped using Windows help files...they were so much more efficient!

> I was so mad that software stopped using Windows help files

Are you referring to HTML Help? I believe they rendered those with Internet Explorer; I'm willing to bet they still do for backwards compatibility.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#73

Post by tentacleuno »

sheepscreek wrote: post #20

Hypothetically, could JavaScript support be added by using a lightweight engine, such as QuickJS?

If my (somewhat distant) understanding is correct, Dillo doesn't employ sandboxing like the other browsers. If this is the case, then adding support for JavaScript would be disastrous -- there are reasons why modern browsers use things like setuid, seccomp bpf, etc. etc.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#74

Post by tentacleuno »

pipeline_peak wrote: post #50

> Project objectives : > Lower the barrier of entry to the web. > Support old or small machines and slow connections. Ram is cheap today, unfortunately the industry isn’t very humanitarian so they took advantage of that. Now as the world expects fluent animation and eye candy, it’s virtually impossible to have a browser support as many sites as chrome and support older machines.

> Now as the world expects fluent animation and eye candy

How so? A lot of websites rely upon animations (I'm guessing you're referring to more advanced CSS support here), yet people still use browsers like w3m, elinks, lynx, etc.

If anything, I'd imagine the information density would be much greater with something like Dillo: you'd have much less distracting (as you put it, "eye candy") to draw attention away from the text on the page, which is most certainly welcome IMO.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#76

Post by bombcar »

heads wrote: post #65

The world of low spec hardware really does need faster, lighter browsers. Too many times now have I configured an SBC, RPi, or even a laptop that’s just a few years old and been disappointed that, while everything else is wonderful and fast and smooth looking, it is browser performance that is the one thing holding me back. I am resigned to the fact that some of my requirements really do mean I need a Ryzen 7 with 16…

It’s sad. I have clear memories of browsing the web quite capably with windows 98 and 64MB of RAM (or less!) and now we can’t even do it with gigabytes.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#77

Post by rodarima »

williamcotton wrote: post #72

Is it pronounced “dil-ah” or “dil-oh”? The former being the central Texas pronunciation and definitely without the “arma”!

I always pronounced it as the Spanish "armadillo" word /aɾmaðiʎo/ but Jorge uses "dil-oh":

https://youtu.be/A6mb9qt2-3o?t=212

Also, the video explains a lot about of the project, but in terrible quality :-D

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#79

Post by niutech »

tentacleuno wrote: post #70
heads wrote: post #65

The world of low spec hardware really does need faster, lighter browsers. Too many times now have I configured an SBC, RPi, or even a laptop that’s just a few years old and been disappointed that, while everything else is wonderful and fast and smooth looking, it is browser performance that is the one thing holding me back. I am resigned to the fact that some of my requirements really do mean I need a Ryzen 7 with 16…

> MS Teams I really do empathize here, after having to use Teams for around 2 years. It's amazingly slow, confusing, buggy (it would crash the tab quite regularly), and just generally a perfect role model for what software shouldn't be[0]. I'm still quite amazed that Microsoft decided this was acceptable. I'm curious how Slack performs; perhaps they're not trying harder because there's no[t much] competition in this…

For a lightweight MS Teams experience, try: https://github.com/fossteams/teams-cli (terminal client), https://github.com/cacticouncil/lounge-lizard (both Slack & Teams) or https://github.com/EionRobb/purple-teams (plugin for Pidgin).

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#80

Post by niutech »

heads wrote: post #65

The world of low spec hardware really does need faster, lighter browsers. Too many times now have I configured an SBC, RPi, or even a laptop that’s just a few years old and been disappointed that, while everything else is wonderful and fast and smooth looking, it is browser performance that is the one thing holding me back. I am resigned to the fact that some of my requirements really do mean I need a Ryzen 7 with 16…

Check out more lightweight web browsers: NetSurf, Pale Moon, K-Meleon on Goanna, Otter Browser, Ultralight, as well as terminal apps: Carbonyl, Browsh, Links (it has a graphical mode too).
Post reply on HN