Although I can't speak for other operating systems I believe this argument still holds true.
The problem with using the native operating system web browser Internet Explorer in PureBasic is that the rendering engine can vary from version to version and also even change from an update.
The last time I used an embedded browser (IE) in an application the feedback I received from my users was terrible. There were rendering issues between 2k/xp/vista and even some people using the same OS had mixed results (IE6/IE7).
I can see a real benefit to PureBasic if the embedded web browser used the same rendering engine across all operating systems and OS versions. Because the rendering engine would be shipped with the application compatibility in any environment would be ensured.
The current implementation may be alright for browsing websites but it's not a useful gadget for pushing sophisticated content as reliably as it could be.
Opera or FireFox for embedded web applications
Good points, and it would allow advanced control (more so than currently with the web gadget).
Issue is performance and size/bloat though.
Gecko (Firefox) is pretty good but last I checked, the embedding was kinda messy.
With Trident (IE) it's easier (it's always there at least with W2000 and later),
but it won't be until IE8 that Trident becomes fully web standards compliant. (IE8 beta passes the ACID2 test, the only browser so far that I know to do so)
Presto (Opera's engine) would be more suitable, it's small, fast. But, last I asked them they have no .dll implementation one can use/call directly. And who knows what it would cost to embed or get one.
Webkit (based on KHTML and used in Safari) might be an option as well.
There is hardly any other I'd recommend as the rest would not be that heavily developed as those four.
Here is a comparison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... ut_engines
Issue is performance and size/bloat though.
Gecko (Firefox) is pretty good but last I checked, the embedding was kinda messy.
With Trident (IE) it's easier (it's always there at least with W2000 and later),
but it won't be until IE8 that Trident becomes fully web standards compliant. (IE8 beta passes the ACID2 test, the only browser so far that I know to do so)
Presto (Opera's engine) would be more suitable, it's small, fast. But, last I asked them they have no .dll implementation one can use/call directly. And who knows what it would cost to embed or get one.
Webkit (based on KHTML and used in Safari) might be an option as well.
There is hardly any other I'd recommend as the rest would not be that heavily developed as those four.
Here is a comparison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison ... ut_engines
I see it the same way. I would like to see webkit, as this passes already ACID, ACID2 and ACID3 tests. And this is growing on a few smartphone mobile device (beside iPhone).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PB4.1 - Win: MacBook black 2008 2,4 GHz, 4 GB RAM, MacOSX 10.5/VMWare/WinXP
PB4.1 - Mac: MacMini G4 1,4 GHz, 512 MB RAM, MacOSX 10.4
PB4.1 - Win: MacBook black 2008 2,4 GHz, 4 GB RAM, MacOSX 10.5/VMWare/WinXP
PB4.1 - Mac: MacMini G4 1,4 GHz, 512 MB RAM, MacOSX 10.4
- Joakim Christiansen
- Addict
- Posts: 2452
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 4:12 pm
- Location: Norway
- Contact:
Re: Opera or FireFox for embedded web applications
You need to make sure the html/css looks right in several browsers then before releasing it, I know it's a pain in the ass, but it will probably make you code your html better in the future.Mistrel wrote:The last time I used an embedded browser (IE) in an application the feedback I received from my users was terrible. There were rendering issues between 2k/xp/vista and even some people using the same OS had mixed results (IE6/IE7).
But I do agree with you that there should be options for this.
I like logic, hence I dislike humans but love computers.