TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! ANSI
echo: tech
to: All
from: Charles Angelich
date: 2003-10-04 07:21:08
subject: Firebird browser

I guess I'm just not 'getting it'?

I now have various DOS browsers including Arachne (the only
real GUI browser for DOS). I have LYNX386(DOS), LYNX(Linux),
LINKS(both Linux and Windows versions), Netscape v3.x(Linux),
Netscape v4.08(w31), Opera v3.62(w31), Mozilla v1.3, Firebird
v0.6.1 and Internet Explorer v3.x (w31) and v6 (W2K). If I want
speed the LYNX or LINKS browsers being text-only will kick the
cr*p out of any GUI browser. I won't bother to compare
text-only to the GUI versions. My install of Firebird clocks in
at 18.3 meg on an NTFSv5 partition, Mozilla v1.3 clocks in at
26.7 meg on the same partition and Internet Explorer v6 clocks
in at 15.7 meg on the same partition. Firebird is 'small'? 

On my machine loading is fastest using IEx v6, Firebird, and
then Mozilla going from fastest to slowest. Browsing with
Firebird is marginally faster (I think) but nothing compared to
the difference I originally found going from Netscape to Opera
v3.62 on my W31 machine. 

The 'tabbed browsing' seems to dupe what I get in my toolbar at
the bottom of my screen which begs the question "por qua?". I
guess it avoids opening another instance of Firebird for each
URL but with systems having as much memory as we do these days
I don't see that as a big deal anymore (Opera v3.62 does this
already on my W31 system where I only have 16 meg of memory). 

My personal homepage has all the search engines I need which
means the little search addtion to the toolbar is a zero for
me. I don't do 'wholesale' downloading of dozens of files each
day and don't need a 'download manager' which also explains why
I don't need to reinstall my OS each month. ;-) 

The default font size is one size smaller than Mozilla uses
which gives the impression of 'more display' page, it's not.
Mozilla already uses a smaller basefont than IEx uses, more
'sizzle' and less 'steak'? 

I've also found that neither Mozilla nor Firebird will
autostart MIDI music from a webpage and play it in the
background. In the process of attempting to remedy this problem
discovered a few 'wrinkles' for other plugins/players. 

Apparently the _unsupported_unofficial_ installer for Firebird
will make some needed registry changes for these plugins that
won't happen if you just unzip Firebird into a directory as it
comes from www.mozilla.org? I find no 'readme' nor other
documentation of this stored within the Firebird zip file nor
within the installation itself. 

There is a 'registry.reg' file that will make these changes for
you if you look for the solution and stumble onto this
information on your own but I'm not certain using a '.reg'
patch is recommended for W2K and therefore have not tried it.
This information exists on the webpage for the _unsupported_
installer btw. I did look at the data within the '.reg' file
and can understand why it is necessary but cannot find
documentation for manually entering this information even
though the webpage claims there _is_ an explanation how to do
this manually? 

There is an auto-loading javascript named winpref.js at 
MozillaFireBird>defaults>pref> that controls what versions of
plugins Firebird will scan for and use. The scan for Windows
Multi-Media Player begins at version 7.0 which is cr*p since
many installs of Windows came with version 6.4 of WMMP
including W2K! Yes, I changed this per the instructions and no
it did not 'fix' the problem of not auto-playing MIDI music
from HTML webpages. 

To use the automated installer appears to obligate us to be
using 'beta' releases of Firebird rather than 'stable' release
versions. I do not want to be a beta-tester for Mozilla and
after reading their requirements just to report a 'bug' don't
even want to be bothered to do that either. 

For many years now Netscape (Mozilla, now Firebird) has been
'interesting' but nothing to celebrate. Their has been a lack
of purpose in the directions development has taken and many
hurrahs about their 'gecko engine'. Frankly, who cares? I just
want a good browser and preferably more than I can get from the
default installed Internet Explorer or why bother? 

Yes, I know we can all run away from the 'script kiddies' and
hide behind a less popular browser where they won't be able
to hurt us as often but I'd rather kick the cr*p out of the
'script kiddies' and just use the default browser until I find
a third party browser that is obviously better. I'm guessing
that would be Opera but it's not free and I'm cheap? ;-) 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed.

--- Maximus/2 3.01
* Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 106/2000 633/267

SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com

Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.