Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Software Businesses Apple

Omni Releases OmniWeb 4.5 Using Safari Engine 116

Posted by pudge from the omni-lovin dept.
John C. Worsley writes "The Omni Group released version 4.5 of OmniWeb, based on Apple's WebCore and JavaScriptCore frameworks (the same KHTML-derived APIs that Safari uses)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Omni Releases OmniWeb 4.5 Using Safari Engine More

Omni Releases OmniWeb 4.5 Using Safari Engine

Comments Filter:

  • finally! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @11:53AM (#6645909) Homepage Journal
    this is awesome. i've been using omniweb since when openstep was a valid os and continued with it through os x because ie was such a beast. but safari is so much faster and better at rendering. if omni keeps their feature list (notably page change notification) this will make them the 800 lb gorilla of mac browsers.

    • Re:finally! (Score:5, Informative)

      by hype7 ( 239530 ) <u3295110@anu.eduNETBSD.au minus bsd> on Friday August 08, 2003 @12:44PM (#6646637) Journal
      omniweb has some stuff that apple could do well to integrate into safari - but they won't!

      which is why I'm glad they've opened the engine up for third party use, because it means Apple can focus on speed and integration with the OS, and 3rd parties can get on with innovating.

      The coolest feature in omniweb has to be the ability to customise urls in the url line; for example, I've set it up so if I type
      fedex 574849
      then it goes to the fedex order tracking site, and tracks order 574849. You can set these up for google, imdb, and anything else that gives results based on variables stored in the URL. It's awesome, and I haven't seen anything implemented like it anywhere else.

      -- james
      • It's awesome, and I haven't seen anything implemented like it anywhere else.

        Umm... you mean like keywords in Mozilla?

        I think they have been around since 0.9.

        Basically, you define a keyword for a bookmark and place '%s' somewhere in the bookmarked URL. When you type the keyword in the Location bar, anything that follows is used to replace the '%s'.

        - Tony

        • Re:finally! (Score:5, Informative)

          by Timothy J. Wood ( 8573 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @02:07PM (#6647760) Homepage

          Actually ... checks CVS... (yes, I work for Omni [omnigroup.com])

          OmniWeb's shortcuts have been around since at least Apr, 1998 (compared to May, 2001 according to Old Mozilla Releases [mozilla.org]). They were around in less featureful incarnations back to 1996 or 1997, judging from what I see in CVS.

          Remember, OmniWeb is one of the oldest browsers still around:

          revision 1.1.1.1 date: 1994/02/16 21:53:53; author: kc; state: Exp; lines: +0 -0

          Here's OmniWeb!

          We love it when other browsers copy OmniWeb's features (and we've certainly copied features from other places). What is even better is that with WebCore/JavaScriptCore we have to spend less time futzing with web standards (if they can be called that) and can work on honest-to-goodness innovations.

      • Re:finally! (Score:3, Informative)

        by spencerogden ( 49254 )
        Konq also has this feature, with built in queries for many popular sites.
      • being lazy I have a keyword for PHP

        php function_name

        works like a charm.

      • Re:finally! (Score:4, Informative)

        by Feztaa ( 633745 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @02:19PM (#6647908) Homepage
        You can do that in Mozilla, [netscape.com] as well.

      • which is why I'm glad they've opened the engine up for third party use, because it means Apple can focus on speed and integration with the OS, and 3rd parties can get on with innovating.

        Not as if they had a whole lot of choice, kHTML being open-source. Still there seems to be a lot of mutual admiration between the Safari and Konqueror teams, as reflected by friendly pronouncemnts and such.

        I've always liked the kHTML engine. I just hope that it gets "borrowed" even more than it is already.

    • Um, I hate to break it to you - but Omni's page change notification system is hopelessly broken. It relies on websites returning a "304" response to indicate pages haven't been changed since a certain date, and a "200" response if they have. This worked back in the 90's. It doesn't anymore.

      Many many many web sites now always return "200" no matter what. Google? 200. Any blogs you happen to read at Xanga, Blogspot, etc? 200. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, Slashdot, Yahoo, Apple? 200. Always. Without fail.

  • still no Pogo? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by boomerny ( 670029 )
    I may be the only one wanting this, but there still seems to be no Mac OSX browser that is able to run Pogo games. Under 9 I could use IE, and it still works under Classic, but I prefer not to use Classic if I can help it. Oh well, just another gripe of mine.

    • Re:still no Pogo? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by shamino0 ( 551710 )
      I've been playing Pogo games successfully using Safari on my system.

      Mozilla also works for most games, but it is painfully slow for Word Whomp, which is one of my favorites.

      What problems are you seeing?

      • word whomp is what I want to play, it is just way too slow to use. Most games are too slow, even the slots. The only two games I can really play are the crossword and word find. It may be my old Pismo is just too slow, but everything ran great under OS9.
        • What version of the OS are you running? I had issues with Word Whomp being painfully slow. However, after the 10.2 update or one of the 10.2.x updates, it became decently playable (hmmm, that sounds weird). See if updating your system helps out (in case you haven't yet).
    • My wife plays Pogo games (mostly Turbo 21) with Safari and Mozilla.

  • Not zactly. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08, 2003 @12:01PM (#6646038)
    For the record, OmniWeb 4.5 does not use the "Safari engine." See, Safari is based on a framework called "WebKit." It's an Objective C framework. OmniWeb uses only WebCore and JavaScriptCore, open source libraries that are not really intended for public use.

    The correct course of action would have been for Omni Group to wait for WebKit's release, rather than using WebCore and JavaScriptCore themselves. Alas, they chose to do it the wrong way. The result will be compatibility problems and bugs, unfortunately.

    I applaud Omni Group for being really cool in many ways. This time, though, they really pulled a lame one.
    • What's the difference between WebCore and WebKit? Some higher-level ObjC classes and interfaces? How is using WebCore going to cause the problems? It is still the "Safari Engine," although perhaps not all of it.

    • Re:Not zactly. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Elwood P Dowd ( 16933 ) <judgmentalist@gmail.com> on Friday August 08, 2003 @12:18PM (#6646251) Journal
      Omni Group isn't exactly "the public" when it comes to NSprogramming. There may be features that they would like to implement that require reaching in and grabbing stuff inside WebCore and JavaScriptCore. They wouldn't have that option with WebKit.

      I don't see why this would necessarily give rise to compatibility problems or bugs. The Safari and KHTML groups should keep both WebKit and WebCore updated just fine.

      Has anybody used the product? Is it the vast improvement that we all expected?
      • it seems to be slower than Safari on my machines. The non-inclusion of tabs is a little behind the times. Even if you don't use tabs you should at least have the choice. It does seem a bit better at rendering than the previous versions that I've tried.

      • Re: Major upgrade in rendering (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Alderete ( 12656 ) * <slashdot@alSLACK ... com minus distro> on Friday August 08, 2003 @02:59PM (#6648356) Homepage

        Yes, OmniWeb 4.5 is a major improvement in terms of quality of rendering and compatibility with more sites. And, as suggested, OmniGroup has indeed implemented features in their browser which would probably be impossible if they only used WebKit. This is a trivial one, but they automatically render hanging punctuation, rather than inline.

        Go to http://www.happycog.com/lectures/dwws/ [happycog.com] in both OmniWeb and Safari, and look at the placement of the opening quotation mark for the body copy to see this.

        Minor feature only typographers will likely notice, but I'm sure there are many more instances where OmniGroup has added "fit-and-finish" to the raw materials provided by Apple.

        • This is a trivial one, but they automatically render hanging punctuation, rather than inline.

          Ah, so that's what that's called. I noticed this feature immediately and thought it looked kind of odd. So much of typography has been lost in the transition to digital that when it comes back it looks weird.
        • But did you notice that in hanging-punctuation lines, text selection goes funny? Try selecting some text on one of these lines and you'll see what I mean: selection acts as if the punctuation were inline, so that any text you select is one character out of phase! They certainly need to fix that if hanging quotes are here to stay.

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @03:08PM (#6648469)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Still no tabbed browsing (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sick Dave ( 631088 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @12:04PM (#6646086)
    When the hell will they add tabs? Everybody else is doing it, why can't OmniGroup?
    • They're waiting for eveyone else to jump off a bridge first.

      • Re:Still no tabbed browsing (Score:4, Insightful)

        by kingLatency ( 624983 ) <[ten.tsacmoc] [ta] [nhak.xela]> on Friday August 08, 2003 @01:01PM (#6646877) Homepage
        They're waiting for eveyone else to jump off a bridge first. This is nonsense. I've met one person ever that didn't like tabbed browsing. Everyone else recognizes it for what it is, a very useful feature. Also, it's unobtrusive for those that wish not to use it. I think that if they added this, they'd get a lot more people to try (or come back to, in my case) to their browser.

        • Re:Still no tabbed browsing (Score:1, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I've met one person ever that didn't like tabbed browsing.

          Then you don't get out much. Use google if you must. Tabs are merely a poor substitute for a decent window manager.

          • You mean, a window manager which recognizes gestures in every app?

            I use tabs mainly for the ability to change pages while browsing with just a rightclick-up-right gesture. And I haven't met yet a window manager which let me do that - namely, changing between windows in a same application with a gesture.

            Not to mention the wonderfull usefullness of having the title of all pages not mixed with the titles of other open programs.
            • well then, your problems have been answered, almost.
              by Expose [apple.com]
              change windows in the same app, or change apps, with the flick of a wrist :)
              • Yes, I knew of Expose. It doesn't solve the same specific problem of quickly changing through related pages which you already know where are.

                But for general application-switching, it certainly may be great. I haven't tried it though, I don't have Mac OS X.
                • Expose can switch between the various windows of the same app, in much the same manner as it switches between multiple apps.

                  the 'flick of the wrist' factor plus it being visual identification rather than having to read something gives it an edge IMO.
          • Then you don't get out much. Use google if you must. Tabs are merely a poor substitute for a decent window manager. Apparently, the definition of 'getting out' to you is discussing the merits of features of web browsers. But I won't judge you for your social life. If you hadn't noticed, OmniWeb is an OS X browser. You can't use this browser in X11 with the window manager of your choice. You are forced to use it in Apple's windowing environment. Anyways, I still say that tabbed browsing doesn't get in th
        • Make that two, I don't care for them. I know they're available in Safari, but I've never tried enabling them, and wasn't impressed with them in Mozilla based browsers. I just click the thumb button on my mouse to close the foreground window, and tabs would just make things more complicated, less intuitive for me.

          • As you said, you can simply not use tabs if you don't like them. Therefore they're not intrusive as a feature to those who wont use them. I stand by my statement that having tabbed browsing would bring more users to (or back to) OmniWeb.
            • And allow me the honor of being the next in a long line of people you'll meet who dislike tabs. They are a poor solution to the problem, and unquestionably implemented at the wrong layer.

              If what you want is a single-gesture way of switching linearly through the windows in the current application, you want command-~, something all Cocoa applications get for free.

              And tabs do have a cost to those who don't use them: the opportunity cost of the development time spent on them. Tabs don't implement themselves,

    • In Panther this will be less of an issue (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Paradox ( 13555 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:20PM (#6649369) Homepage Journal
      I've rapidly been discovering that in Panther, I need tabs less and less. Expose really is a great way to deal with multiple windows and multiple apps. More and more, I find myself using Expose and a lot of windows instead of tabs, because tabs provide no visual recognition besides a title, which can very frequentlh be identical over multiple pages.

      So maybe that trollish AC that replied below this about tabs being a stopgap for a bad window manager is partially correct, if somewhat socially inept. Between app hiding, app switching, and Expose functions for all apps, and-in my opinion, far more useful-just one app, tabs are actually more of an annoyance.
      • i agree with you, having used expose. however, there is absolutely no elegant replacement for some of the benefits you get out of tabs. one such benefit (albet funny but a perfectly valid example) is porn. when i have a page of 20 thumbnails, by god i want to cmd+click all 20 and let them load in separate threads, all isolated to one convient minimizable/closable window. a feature like this might be replicable with a complex system of open new window under (so the window doesn't lose focus) or some other
        • There is a great Java app (available for OS X) called Page Sucker. It will grab those images for you. Its basically a front end to the wget command in the terminal... but easier to use. Of all of the wget front ends Ive used, Page Sucker is the best. Unfortunately its Java, slow and imperfect.

          http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macos x/ 13307
      • And if you don't have Panther, what then?

        Because an OS feature makes up for it doesn't mean it's not a vital feature in a browser. I use tabbed browsing extensively on both my Windows and OS X machines, and I won't use a browser that doesn't have it if I don't have a choice. If Omniweb provided tabs as a feature, I might give it another look (tried it already -- didn't like it), but I don't have Panther or Expose -- so I need my tabs.
    • Very Simple. Omni has stated many times that 4.5 was ONLY going to change the rendering engin from their own to WebCore. There are no other features and if you already paid for OW this update does not cost any more money. The next version 5.0 should have tabs and other features in and will continue to use Webcore.

  • Kudos for a good decision (Score:3, Insightful)

    by HotButteredHampster ( 614950 ) <s,biickert&shaw,ca> on Friday August 08, 2003 @12:43PM (#6646620) Homepage

    Way to go, Omni Group! IMHO, nothing can kill a small company faster than trying to reinvent the wheel. HTML rendering is a commodity. The public expectation is that it will happen correctly. Do it wrong (like OmniWeb used to with annoying frequency) and people will jump all over you. Let a bigger group/company do it for you and reap the rewards!

    That way you can spend your developer time creating the application experience, which is where OmniWeb has excelled in the past and will continue to in the future. I expect to see great things, maybe great enough to make me part with $29.95!

    HBH

  • Nice, but not quite ready to replace Safari for me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RalphBNumbers ( 655475 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @01:59PM (#6647666)
    I haven't seriously used omniweb since before OSX was released. The speed was just too slow on my admittedly sluggish 233mhz G3.
    I've got to say, 4.5 is a *huge* improvement in the speed department, but there are still a lot of things I'd like to see improved before I would replace Safari as my everyday browser. (much less. before I would pay for it)

    For starters, it needs tabs, I've gotten addicted to them from various mozilla variants and Safari.

    Then they need to support java 1.4.1, they're still using the old 1.3.1 carbon version, which just isn't up to par anymore imho. (Although, to be fair Omniweb does seem to work around alot of the problems the old carbon plugin had in Safari, IE, and Mozilla.)

    They also need to provide for custom user style sheets, which I couldn't find an option for.

    That said, there are some things OmniWeb does really well that I'd like to see in safari.
    For instance, spell checking forum input as I type without my needing to manually request it (I can't believe they still haven't fixed this in Safari).
    Also, auto checking and updating bookmarks would be nice.
    • yes, it would be nice if browsers besides Safari used the 1.4.1 JavaCocoaPlugin. It would also be nice if Apple released some sort of documentation on how to call it. I *think* you can load it as a normal bundle, then call it just like the old Carbon plug-in, but it'd be nice to have something written someplace to back this up.

    • spell checking forum input as I type without my needing to manually request it (I can't believe they still haven't fixed this in Safari).


      Err? I don't (nor have I ever) had this problem? Every cocoa text input widget supports spellchecking as you type. It should stay that way once you use the context menu to set it. Is this status of that option resetting itself common?

  • Why would I want to use this??? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gooru ( 592512 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @02:03PM (#6647712)
    Safari: free with Jaguar and an awesome browser
    Mozilla: free and not quite as awesome
    Internet Explorer: free but dead
    OmniWeb: $29.95 based on same engine as Safari
    Opera: still clueless as to why my friends pay for it

    Furthermore, I can put together a web browser in less than five minutes with all the basic functionality I ever use (except tabs) using XCode, IB, and the WebKit. Why would I want to pay someone $29.95?!?!?!?

  • Omniweb's Unique Features (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08, 2003 @02:25PM (#6647990)
    (1) Live-Searchable History
    (2) Form Spell Check (I'm Soaking in it)
    (3) Self Updating Bookmarks Through The Dock
    (4) Self-Fixing Bookmarks
    (5) Superior Cookie Management (Three Levels)
    (6) Programmable Address Bar Searches (Google, VersionTracker.. etc)
    (7) Ad Blocking (And Yes OmniWeb Has Pop-up Blocking Too)
    (8) Unbeatable Download Manager (Never seen it's Match)
    (9) Extensive Source View, Edit, Publishing Capabilities
    (10) Fully Voice Activated Interface and Link Navigation
    (11) Speakable Pages (Useful When Your Eyes Just Can't Read Anymore)
    (12) Browser Compatibility Settings
    (13) JavaScript Compatibility Settings (Can Tie in or out With #11)
    (14) JavaScript Bookmarklets
    (15) Application Helper Settings For Downloads
    (16) Network Activity Monitor (Similar to Mail.app's)
    (17) Much More that I'm Overlooking

    • (2) Form Spell Check (I'm Soaking in it)

      I write my posts, etc., in text editors first, and then paste things in. I find text editors are more stable (and manipulate text better) than Web browsers. (And OmniWeb does like to crash, you know.)

      (3) Self Updating Bookmarks Through The Dock

      What do you mean? Are you cluttering up your Dock with bookmarks? More info, please. :)

      (4) Self-Fixing Bookmarks

      I seem to recall typing "www.slashdot.org" for a bookmark and Camino asking if I wanted to redirect

      • I write my posts, etc., in text editors first, and then paste things in. I find text editors are more stable (and manipulate text better) than Web browsers. (And OmniWeb does like to crash, you know.)

        Text editors can be overkill sometimes, especially if you're just typing something short.

        (7) Ad Blocking (And Yes OmniWeb Has Pop-up Blocking Too)

        Hey.

        The solution you suggested would not be used by 99% of users and is a pain to set up. With OmniWeb, all you need is a couple of clicks within the GUI.

        • TextEdit isn't overkill. It's fast and small. BBEdit isn't really overkill if you're just typing, and if you suddenly need to add a line break or closing P to the end of a line, it takes two seconds.

          Hydra is relevant because it does syntax highlighting just like OW does. It does everything OW does, I think.

          Mozilla can block banner ads with a right-click, if you're not into /etc/hosts modification.

          • TextEdit isn't overkill. It's fast and small. BBEdit isn't really overkill if you're just typing, and if you suddenly need to add a line break or closing P to the end of a line, it takes two seconds.

            Let's say you're only typing one or two sentences - does it really make sense to switch to another app? Especially just to stick a line break in?

            Hydra is relevant because it does syntax highlighting just like OW does. It does everything OW does, I think.

            But then you need to open another program. With

            • Mozilla has a composition component, too. If you're writing code, why not use a program that's designed for it, anyway? One app for one job.

              Sorry, I should have assumed you'd done no research into other browsers before declaring all the things I need to pay for in a browser.

              Little, if anything, OW does can't be had by other, less costly or free, and at least as easy to use programs.

              • Mozilla has a composition component, too. If you're writing code, why not use a program that's designed for it, anyway? One app for one job.

                Mozilla is bulky and slow and a full web page designer is overkill sometimes. If all I want to do is change a link or update some text, which makes up the majority of what I've needed to do the last wee while, then OmniWeb is perfect for the job.

                Sorry, I should have assumed you'd done no research into other browsers before declaring all the things I need to pay for

          • I like BBEdit a lot, except for one particular bug-- when I have more than one document open, and I try to save or close one of them, sometimes the action affects one of the other open docs. It's really, really annoying, and I'm a little pissed that BareBones dropped support for BBEdit Lite. No new versions, no fix for this problem.

            So are you using the Pro version?

      • As you point out, Mozilla has tons of features, but it competes in a much more future-proof way: software freedom. Competing on features can sometimes hide denying users software freedom. I don't want to lose the opportunity to leverage a free market for getting things changed the way I want them. I've used lots of non-free software before and I'm not ready to put my software freedom on the line like that anymore.

    • (18) ...
      (19) Profit!
    • (18) No tabs.

      boo. hiss. boo.

      Or did I miss something? I can't find them.

    • (2) Form Spell Check

      Is not one of Omniweb's unique features... (at least all the forms can be spell checked for ME in Safari)
    • You claim these are "unique" features, but I would say that several of them are found in other browsers.

      I listed several features in a post [slashdot.org] recently that talked about the feature set beween iCab, Opera/Mac and OmniWeb.

      While OmniWeb was a nice browser, it was missing a lot of the features that makes iCab "a control-freak's dream".

      Right now I am using Safari+PithHelmet as my primary browser, and I still definitely miss the control that is offerred by iCab.

      I have not had a chance to try out OmniWeb 4.5 yet
  • .. I perfer brushed metal look and safari. Only thing I miss is mouse gestures, hopefully they will include it in the next version or Ill just wait for opera 7 for OSX...

    • Re:Looks good but.. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ihatewinXP ( 638000 ) on Friday August 08, 2003 @04:37PM (#6649568)
      "or Ill just wait for opera 7 for OSX..."

      Youre going to be waiting quite some time. There is absolutely no room for another browser on the mac platform. I wish there was room for OmniWeb and I hope it suceeds - but Opera? Sorry but 1. its an ugly port and 2. they burned any credibility they had in the mac community when they bashed Apple for not licensing their HTML Engine.
      And btw, mouse gestures can be added to any cocoa app (which OmniWeb is) just do a search for gestures on Versiontracker and im sure you will find it.
      • Thanks for the gestures tip, it works great.

        Im too lazy now to find any links but opera first said that they will no longer support osx, then a few weeks later they said they will support it because maromedia will use operas engine in their tools (studio mx)...

    • Need Gestures??? (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Cocoa Gestures [bitart.com] is your answer... works in all cocoa apps -Rocks!!!

  • Anyone else get a laugh out of this..? (Score:3, Funny)

    by thatguywhoiam ( 524290 ) on Saturday August 09, 2003 @12:00AM (#6652688)
    The default OmniWeb 4.5 page, near the small ads for their other products, has this gem:

    Attn: ad dept. Put the corny "heartfelt plea for filthy lucre" text here.

    I guess that copy was approved.

  • I downloaded it, installed it, ran it.

    The browser window didn't render correctly -- squashed-looking fonts, cut-off address bar, and the first few pages I browsed too were a similar mess. Massively buggy rendering.

    Closed it, uninstalled it. I'll try again next version. I wouldn't even use this app for free, much less $30.

    Incidentally, I went through this same procedure with OmniWeb a few months ago.
    • I feel for you, really. Not being able to see your favorite sites is enough to make you toss the browser aside immediately. I've done the same thing plenty of times. One thing that would be really nice to know, though: what sites were causing you these troubles?

      Also: cut-off address bar? Cut off by what?

      This isn't intended to be poking at you in any way. It's just that I do tech support, and like to see specific complaints whenever possible.
      • Glad to oblige. I've put three screenshots from my Omniweb session into this directory [dimfuture.net].

        The first screenshot (and I think, the worst) is CNN.com. You can see for yourself what happens up by the address bar. It's a mess. The second screenshot is one of Omniweb's own pages... if you look in the middle under the address bar, you can see where the fonts are squashed together and illegible. That isn't a page, that's Omniweb's own window. The third page is that same corruption repeating on Omniweb's own page.

        So

        • Re:In short (Score:2, Informative)

          by webfiend ( 112579 )
          For some strange reason, OmniWeb and Metallifizer don't get along. The best workaround is to add OmniWeb to Metallifizer's "Exclude" list.
    • You're running Metallifizer, which attempts to change the appearance of running applications by loading code into them. I'd hardly consider that an OmniWeb problem. On a normally-functioning OS X system, OmniWeb renders fine.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

IN MY OPINION anyone interested in improving himself should not rule out becoming pure energy. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

Close