Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

Start planning your move to a browser that doesn't violate your privacy...

"Google plans to track credit card spending"

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40027706

[Get Real!]

Start planning your move to a browser that doesn't violate your privacy...

"Google plans to track credit card spending"

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40027706

Here’s how fools will be surrendering their credit card details to Google…

https://developers.google.com/web/funda ... nt-request

[Get Real!]

Another FIRST brought to you by the Classic browser!

Some of you may recall PiP (Picture in Picture) mode on your TV screens, so why not implement it in browsers?

v1.7 of the Classic browser coming soon, will include (among other cool things) native Multi-Frame mode:

MultiFrame.png

And this is a message for Sotos...

* Within 12 months I caught up to them.

* Within 14 months I matched them.

* Within 16 months I surpassed them.

* Within 18 months I’m farting all over them!

[repulsewarrior]

...multi-frame, i like that.

[Sotos]

GR, if somebody needs functionality like that they can get with a plugin, e.g. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... nljlkkocbk Bloating your browser with "features" is a thing the past decades. Only essential functionality should be build in. From what I know most Chromium based browsers support extensions from the Chrome Web Store. If yours can't do that yet then this is the one feature you need to add, instead of creating basic versions of what is already out there by yourself. And when your browser shows up here: http://gs.statcounter.com/ then I will admit that I was wrong about the futility of you trying to compete with Google, Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla etc. You don't need to surpass them, just show up in the chart with like 1% market share

[Get Real!]

GR, if somebody needs functionality like that they can get with a plugin, e.g. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... nljlkkocbk Bloating your browser with "features" is a thing the past decades. Only essential functionality should be build in. From what I know most Chromium based browsers support extensions from the Chrome Web Store. If yours can't do that yet then this is the one feature you need to add, instead of creating basic versions of what is already out there by yourself. And when your browser shows up here: http://gs.statcounter.com/ then I will admit that I was wrong about the futility of you trying to compete with Google, Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla etc. You don't need to surpass them, just show up in the chart with like 1% market share

Bloated code eh? Let's see now...

1. C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Chrome..... 177 MB

2. C:\Program Files (x86)\Google\Update..... 54 MB

3. C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Local\Google... 70 MB (When you don't use it, and 400+ MB when in use!)


So far we have a total of 300...600 MB!

4. On top of that, how many megabytes are your Chrome add-ons and extensions Sotos?

You’ll need about a dozen of them to catch up with what the Classic can do!

All the while the Classic is 115 MB! <---

Also, consider this… I could add another megabyte of JavaScript features and it’ll grow to 116 megabytes! <---


Efanse do ginati sou re Sotiraki...

[Sotos]

I am not talking about the size of the application but about the number of features. Are you planning to bundle 10s of thousands of features with the browser to compete with Chrome and Firefox? That's like those old mobile phones that came with several mediocre apps and you couldn't install whatever you wanted on them. (1) You can't add so many features... it is not about "megabytes of javascript" it is about the amount of work needed to create a decent feature. (2) Even if you had 100s of employees and you could create many features in decent quality (like Google could) it would still not be a good idea to bloat a browser with futures that only few need, but instead let each user install whatever he wants.

[Get Real!]

Are you planning to bundle 10s of thousands of features with the browser to compete with Chrome and Firefox? That's like those old mobile phones that came with several mediocre apps and you couldn't install whatever you wanted on them. (1) You can't add so many features... it is not about "megabytes of javascript" it is about the amount of work needed to create a decent feature. (2) Even if you had 100s of employees and you could create many features in decent quality (like Google could) it would still not be a good idea to bloat a browser with futures that only few need, but instead let each user install whatever he wants.

No, I’m just on the lookout for good useful things that the masses would find useful before considering adding anything.

Like the multi-frame feature I just added… I saw someone do a “split-screen” and I felt I could better that.

Mine now does unlimited frame splitting with no restrictions. And I mean true-frames not popup windows; which is what most are doing and calling it “multiple frames”. They just resize and arrange little popup windows of URLs to make it look like frames but they’re all cheating… None of these browsers have multi-frame MODE because their architecture doesn't allow it.

Yandex cheat…
https://miketips.files.wordpress.com/20 ... .jpg?w=634

Chrome cheat…
https://www.groovypost.com/wp-content/u ... e-tabs.png

IE cheat…
http://www.thetechhub.com/2009/10/web-b ... s-and.html

They’re all popup windows not frames within a frame.

[Sotos]

Vivaldi has this feature build in, but this is not the point. The point is that different people need different things, and if you just add whatever YOU think is useful, then you are just bloating the browser. In any case it would be pointless anyway.. so don't waste your time trying to support extensions.

[Sotos]

GR, after single-handedly obliterating the competition in the browser sector, was hired by Microsoft to create the next version of Windows. This is the first public preview of this brand new never seen before Operating System:
http://windowsreallygoodedition.com/