Comments on: New WebRunner Browser by Mozilla http://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/ Technology News Mon, 13 Feb 2012 07:03:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Site Specific Browsers (SSBs) | AVINASH 2.0http://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-126425 Site Specific Browsers (SSBs) | AVINASH 2.0 Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:49:46 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-126425 [...] Browsers and the idea behind ‘em ’cause this topic has already been discussed by too many awesome [...] [...] Browsers and the idea behind ‘em ’cause this topic has already been discussed by too many awesome [...]

]]> By: Ryanhttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119623 Ryan Tue, 23 Oct 2007 01:49:50 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119623 Thanks for the clarification Mark. I'm just glad that I'm not crazy. ;) Thanks for the clarification Mark. I’m just glad that I’m not crazy. ;)

]]> By: Mark Finklehttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119603 Mark Finkle Tue, 23 Oct 2007 01:06:51 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119603 <div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-119558" rel="nofollow">Ryan wrote:</a><blockquote><div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-119550" rel="nofollow">johnm wrote:</a><blockquote>If you change navigation(or location)=no to yes I think it will show the address bar. I can’t remember which one it is.</blockquote></div>I briefly mentioned that in the article, but even if you show the address bar you can’t actually use it. For some reason it isn’t a text box that you can type in.</blockquote></div>The Location bar is not a textbox because I don't want you to think you can type a URL into it and switch to another website. Use a browser for that :)The Location bar is mainly to let the user see the current URL and copy/paste it to another application if they want to. Ryan wrote:
johnm wrote:
If you change navigation(or location)=no to yes I think it will show the address bar. I can’t remember which one it is.

I briefly mentioned that in the article, but even if you show the address bar you can’t actually use it. For some reason it isn’t a text box that you can type in.

The Location bar is not a textbox because I don’t want you to think you can type a URL into it and switch to another website. Use a browser for that :)

The Location bar is mainly to let the user see the current URL and copy/paste it to another application if they want to.

]]> By: Ryanhttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119558 Ryan Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:31:44 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119558 <div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-119550" rel="nofollow">johnm wrote:</a><blockquote>If you change navigation(or location)=no to yes I think it will show the address bar. I can’t remember which one it is.</blockquote></div> I briefly mentioned that in the article, but even if you show the address bar you can't actually use it. For some reason it isn't a text box that you can type in. johnm wrote:
If you change navigation(or location)=no to yes I think it will show the address bar. I can’t remember which one it is.

I briefly mentioned that in the article, but even if you show the address bar you can’t actually use it. For some reason it isn’t a text box that you can type in.

]]> By: johnmhttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119550 johnm Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:52:40 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119550 If you change navigation(or location)=no to yes I think it will show the address bar. I can't remember which one it is. If you change navigation(or location)=no to yes I think it will show the address bar. I can’t remember which one it is.

]]> By: Ryanhttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119412 Ryan Mon, 22 Oct 2007 02:05:39 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119412 You'll probably have to include the icon in the compressed .webapp file. You’ll probably have to include the icon in the compressed .webapp file.

]]> By: Triphttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119316 Trip Sun, 21 Oct 2007 06:32:38 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-119316 I just created a .webapp for DivShare. It works terrific, but just can't seem to figure out how to apply their icon... I just created a .webapp for DivShare. It works terrific, but just can’t seem to figure out how to apply their icon…

]]> By: Ryanhttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-118570 Ryan Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:06:01 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-118570 <div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-118501" rel="nofollow">Cody wrote:</a><blockquote>6MBs is still a lot for such an application. Opera is smaller in size to install and it’s a full feature browser+mail. </blockquote></div> Opera is indeed a full featured browser, but you have to look at it from all angles. If you only keep Google Reader open all day, for example, and do some casual browsing here and there it would be better to use WebRunner. The memory usage for having that one site open is much less than what Opera is, and if you're not browsing the Web all day you can keep your browser closed then.<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-118565" rel="nofollow">Trip wrote:</a><blockquote>ie7 - 76 mb Maxthon 2 - 72 mb Opera - 62 mb ( yes still no Notebook support) Fx - 50 mb (with 26 extensions) WebRunner - 40 mb</blockquote></div> Good stats there. Thanks for pointing them out. Cody wrote:
6MBs is still a lot for such an application. Opera is smaller in size to install and it’s a full feature browser+mail.

Opera is indeed a full featured browser, but you have to look at it from all angles. If you only keep Google Reader open all day, for example, and do some casual browsing here and there it would be better to use WebRunner. The memory usage for having that one site open is much less than what Opera is, and if you’re not browsing the Web all day you can keep your browser closed then.

Trip wrote:
ie7 – 76 mb
Maxthon 2 – 72 mb
Opera – 62 mb ( yes still no Notebook support)
Fx – 50 mb (with 26 extensions)
WebRunner – 40 mb

Good stats there. Thanks for pointing them out.

]]> By: Triphttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-118565 Trip Wed, 17 Oct 2007 21:35:27 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-118565 A quick little test. Let's not forget that these are memory intensive websites/webapps. With these 5 webapps running - Gmail, Gcal, Docs, Notebook, and Reader. Running XP sp2. Try it out.ie7 - 76 mb Maxthon 2 - 72 mb Opera - 62 mb ( yes still no Notebook support) Fx - 50 mb (with 26 extensions) WebRunner - 40 mb A quick little test. Let’s not forget that these are memory intensive websites/webapps. With these 5 webapps running – Gmail, Gcal, Docs, Notebook, and Reader. Running XP sp2. Try it out.

ie7 – 76 mb
Maxthon 2 – 72 mb
Opera – 62 mb ( yes still no Notebook support)
Fx – 50 mb (with 26 extensions)
WebRunner – 40 mb

]]> By: Codyhttp://cybernetnews.com/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-118501 Cody Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:36:58 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/16/new-webrunner-browser-by-mozilla/#comment-118501 6MBs is still a lot for such an application. Opera is smaller in size to install and it's a full feature browser+mail.Also Webrunner still has a larger memory footprint compared with both Opera and Maxthon 2.Considering that this is only a Site Specific Browser (SSB), it should both be smaller in size and use way less RAM. This proves once more how bloated Firefox is even with just the very basic feature(s)(that is just displaying a single website and nothing more!) 6MBs is still a lot for such an application. Opera is smaller in size to install and it’s a full feature browser+mail.

Also Webrunner still has a larger memory footprint compared with both Opera and Maxthon 2.

Considering that this is only a Site Specific Browser (SSB), it should both be smaller in size and use way less RAM. This proves once more how bloated Firefox is even with just the very basic feature(s)(that is just displaying a single website and nothing more!)

]]>