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

111–120 of 179 posts

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#111

Post by chmod775 »

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…

> I'm curious how Slack performs

My colleagues and myself used Slack for years, were forced to use Teams for about 2 years because of our new parent company, and finally went back to Slack after we collectively quit that shitshow to start a new company.

While Slack isn't perfect either, it's miles better.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#112

Post by n3storm »

I suggest contacting this guy Renato Bravo

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuklruLsO-CFoKK_rjNXrXg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6mb9qt2-3o

At video above Renato comments " ese es mi compañero Jorge " translated "that's my mate Jorge"

I found a Renato Bravo at Linkedin but I don't think is the same person.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#113

Post by wakeupcall »

cxr wrote: post #99
rodarima wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and it has been discussed in the mailing list before [1]. [1]: https://groups.google.com/g/dillo/search?q=javascript However, I don't think the machines that Dillo is targeting would benefit from adding support for it and it would increase a lot the surface for security problems. Maybe my advise would be to use another browser if you have the computing power to run JS.

> I don't think the machines that Dillo is targeting would benefit from adding support for it People tend to overestimate the resources required to run JS and have a miscalibrated sense of how slow they can/should expect it to be. Firefox 1.x and 2.0 worked on machines with substantially worse specs than many of the ones that people are mentioning here (think: sub-GHz PIIIs with 128–256 MB of RAM), and substantial pa…

I was running FF (and netscape before that) on such machines, and they were about the worst possible program to run. My memory of browsers of the era was slow, buggy, and bloated. It was barely usable because the connection speed was by far the biggest bottleneck.

I was using dillo heavily at the time, when we didn't mind differences in rendering. After that I switched to konqueror. As the dhtml/js craze exploded, I caved in to ff when more often than not the websites didn't load or work as expected.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#115

Post by nyanpasu64 »

creesch wrote: post #105
bombcar wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

To be fair, that was also a much lighter web. Even if you remove all the heavy javascript overload modern webpages will be heavier simply due to higher resolution images and other media. It also highly depends on what you want to browse. HN for example will work just fine without much memory. Expecting YouTube to be as light as 90s websites is asking a bit much. Having said that, I do agree that we have overshot, and…

On my Windows 7 throwback computer running an i5 3570K (a damn near top-of-the-line CPU 10 years ago) with iGPU, in Waterfox YouTube stutters when fullscreen in 1080p (even with enhanced-h264ify and hardware video decoding as far as I can tell), both in YouTube and Firefox's pop-out player. Videos play smoothly in Invidious. Enhancer for YouTube™ has a popout/embed button I could test, but it was pulled from addons.mozilla.org due to being broken by YouTube changes (it still works for me on my main computer?).

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#116

Post by creesch »

nyanpasu64 wrote: post #115
creesch wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, that was also a much lighter web. Even if you remove all the heavy javascript overload modern webpages will be heavier simply due to higher resolution images and other media. It also highly depends on what you want to browse. HN for example will work just fine without much memory. Expecting YouTube to be as light as 90s websites is asking a bit much. Having said that, I do agree that we have overshot, and…

On my Windows 7 throwback computer running an i5 3570K (a damn near top-of-the-line CPU 10 years ago) with iGPU, in Waterfox YouTube stutters when fullscreen in 1080p (even with enhanced-h264ify and hardware video decoding as far as I can tell), both in YouTube and Firefox's pop-out player. Videos play smoothly in Invidious. Enhancer for YouTube™ has a popout/embed button I could test, but it was pulled from addons.m…

To be honest, that could be just be some interaction with Waterfox specifically. It's not the first time I have encountered people having various issues with that firefox fork that other browsers don't encounter.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#117

Post by toastal »

I used to test out sites on Dillo a lot to see if the experience was absolutely broken, but Dillo got too rusty so I went to checking Netsurf, w3m & elinks--so a revival is encouraging, especially for underpowered systems. Shame to see a project moving from a self-hosted Mercurial repository to a US-megacorparate-owned Git repository in Microsoft GitHub. …But at least the maintainer is committed to accepting email patches so folks aren’t required to create accounts / accept ToS with them.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#118

Post by subtra3t »

niutech wrote: post #80
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).

I tried using palemoon a few years ago, but many web pages just didn't work at all. I wonder if that's changed?

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#119

Post by forgotpwd16 »

nyanpasu64 wrote: post #115
creesch wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, that was also a much lighter web. Even if you remove all the heavy javascript overload modern webpages will be heavier simply due to higher resolution images and other media. It also highly depends on what you want to browse. HN for example will work just fine without much memory. Expecting YouTube to be as light as 90s websites is asking a bit much. Having said that, I do agree that we have overshot, and…

On my Windows 7 throwback computer running an i5 3570K (a damn near top-of-the-line CPU 10 years ago) with iGPU, in Waterfox YouTube stutters when fullscreen in 1080p (even with enhanced-h264ify and hardware video decoding as far as I can tell), both in YouTube and Firefox's pop-out player. Videos play smoothly in Invidious. Enhancer for YouTube™ has a popout/embed button I could test, but it was pulled from addons.m…

On my Linux laptop with i3-3xxxm (a low-end? CPU even 10+ years ago) with iGPU, in Firefox YouTube plays fine in fullscreen in 1080p even without forcing h264. Enhancer removal is indeed a loss. Can try ImprovedTube.

Re: Show HN: Resurrecting the Dillo browser

#120

Post by unwind »

Cool, I remember the name Dillo from ... way back when, I guess.

Interesting to see a mix of C and C++ in the same codebase, that always makes me curious if there is some internal/mental "pressure" to convert the C code to C++ since that does seem simpler in many ways if you're already using C++.

Also, does anyone know why the functions have a (to me, incredibly random) "a_" prefix? Like this, from "dicache.h" [1]:

    void a_Dicache_init (void);
    DICacheEntry *a_Dicache_get_entry(const DilloUrl *Url, int version);
    void *a_Dicache_png_image(const char *Type, void *Ptr, CA_Callback_t *Call, void **Data);
    void *a_Dicache_gif_image(const char *Type, void *Ptr, CA_Callback_t *Call, void **Data);
It's like a set of perfectly module-prefixed names, but then an additional prefix of "a_" has been added?

Edit: moved a comma.

[1]: https://github.com/dillo-browser/dillo/blob/master/src/dicac...

Post reply on HN