Interview with Camino Developer Mike Pinkerton 116
An anonymous reader writes "As someone who has used Camino for much of the time since the OS X-centric Gecko browser was released, I've been hoping to see it hit version 1.0 (it's at 0.8 now). ArsTechnica has an interview with Mike Pinkerton, the lead developer for Camino in which he talks about the history and future of Camino along with his thoughts on Safari and Firefox."
Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:3, Interesting)
Any obvious advantages from day to day use? I see from their website it has some OSX-specific features that look cool enough, any highlights?
[Swimming in the calm waters of alternative browsers, Safari and Firefox when on Win]
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:5, Interesting)
Both browsers have their rendering quirks, though both are Good Enough(tm) for government work. I prefer the interface of Camino overall, because I find it less visually jarring than the brushed-metal look of Safari (which, before anyone comments, looks downright *weird* in its Aqua "theme," with the brushed-metal look removed).
I still use Camino as my primary browser, though if there's something absolutely critical that I need to get to on a slow connection, I'll use Safari.
Also, Camino tends to play more nicely with sites that (stupidly) exclude browsers based on the user-agent string. Yes, you can change it in Safari, but Camino Just Works(tm) more often than not, and it's one less thing you have to mess with.
I can't really think of a good reason to recommend *against* either one, though. That says a lot for the current state of browsers on the Mac.
p
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:5, Informative)
p
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:1)
It is the latest version of Mac OS X that didn't require a G3 or better processor.
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:5, Informative)
So for day to day browsing, Camino is my default.
At work I use Firefox, mainly for its Web development features.
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:1)
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:5, Informative)
I currently utilize a cable modem and my experience has been that Safari is generally as fast, maybe a little faster in most instances. My comparison method was to delete all of my caches and see which browser brought the pages up faster. It also seems that I can drag images to my desktop a little easier/quicker with Safari.
Camino, on the other hand, handles saving a web page a WHOLE lot better than Safari - I frequently do not get any graphics with a Safari-saved webpage. Camino handles this flawlessly. Camino also has cookie/security controls that are more precise. So, if I have any concerns about security surrounding a website or when I am cruising around looking for eWomen, I use the old el Camino!
All in all, I think Camino is a very good browser and agree, as the article points out, that it is very benificial to the consumer that Safari has some very close competition.
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:4, Informative)
That's a flawed method. The first time you request the page, it will probably be stored in your ISP's proxy cache, so when you try it with another browser, it will come from a cached copy even if you've cleared your browser cache.
Disabling proxies in your browser settings isn't enough as many ISPs institute interception proxies. For instance, virtually all cable modems I've come across have HTTP caches in them.
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:2)
Disabling proxies in your browser settings isn't enough as many ISPs institute interception proxies. For instance, virtually all cable modems I've come across have HTTP caches in them.
Er, that's a good thing. He was testing browser rendering speed, not network performance (bey
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:1)
Re:Safari on Mac, Firefox on PC (Score:1)
Camino Hidden Prefs (adds what most /.ers want) (Score:1)
Head on over to the above URL and do to Camino what most users do to Safari with PithHelmet!
KHTML vs. Gecko (Score:5, Insightful)
For me the biggest difference is that safari still chokes on pages that the gecko engine will not but with the determination and skill of the Safari team this will not be the case for long.
Safari is my default browser since its beta, and my money is on them for the long term. However it is really nice to have options.
Re:KHTML vs. Gecko (Score:5, Interesting)
Until web developers start coding to realworld "LCD" standards, there will always be the need for multiple rendering engines.
Re:KHTML vs. Gecko (Score:1, Interesting)
My blood boils when a page won't work and I see the
Same here... (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it's positively stupid that it's 2004 and there's no single Good Web Browser yet.
Re:KHTML vs. Gecko (Score:2)
Every once in a great while I run across a site that won't render in either, presumably having been coded with all kinds of IE
Re:KHTML vs. Gecko (Score:1)
Competition is good (Score:5, Interesting)
Camino is a good browser, which I started using at 0.4. It seduced me with its beautiful anti-aliased text rendering when the only alternative was IE 5. There were big issues in the day: I never bookmarked anything, because bookmarks were as permanent as writing in sand. Below the tide line. Even so, I used it over IE (mmm... beautiful fonts) and the laughable Mozilla 1.0.
But I was seduced by Safari. It loaded quicker. It was faster. It was simple and elegant, which were things that Camino was going for, but wasn't there yet. I've used Safari ever since. Even as I did so, I was saddened, because I thought Camino would die because it was too late to the party.
However, because Camino leverages Gecko, and Mozilla/Firefox are starting to kick some butt, Camino has had forward momentum even when it was standing still. I use Firefox every day at work (right now, in fact), and it is to Windows what Camino can be to Mac. I've installed Firefox on my web server (the current version of Safari doesn't support OSX 10.2.8). As the interview points out, Firefox is good, but it's not a Macintosh app. Camino is.
There are now two excellent open-source HTML rendering engines which are actively being developed on the Mac platform, which is a much better position than it was when I was playing with Chimera 0.4. With the exit of IE, Apple still has a healthy competitive environment, thanks to projects like Firefox and Camino.
HBH
Re:Competition is good (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Competition is good (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Competition is good (Score:1)
Look at Gmail. Adwords, Adsense, all things done before by other people but google did it better. Hell, Google itself is the biggest example of taking something and making it better.
I guess an even bigger blow to Camino/Mozilla would be a Mac OS X google browser based on khtml...
Re:Competition is good (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Competition is good (Score:2)
It's odd that you think a good Gecko based browser could be a blow to the whole Mozilla project. I think it would be great. Mozilla could then concentrate on what they are good at: writing a browser core.
Firefox might be more secure than IE, faster, etc., but it certainly doesn't have as nice of an interface as a whole. Not that it doesn't have useful features that IE doesn't, like tabbed browsing, bu
Re:Competition is good (Score:2)
You haven't been paying attention.
http://kmeleon.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Re:Competition is good (Score:1)
I don't understand.
I was using Camino, but now I'm back on Safari. It's faster and cleaner, and I haven't found any problems with rendering. I went back to Safari because Camino's plugin architecture, well, doesn't exist.
Firefox is dog slow on my Powerbook. It's also plug ugly IMO. So I'm back on Safari.
Re:Competition is good (Score:1)
You call them "inventions"? Why bitch about adware then?
Re:Competition is good (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Competition is good (Score:2)
Re:Competition is good (Score:1)
And Camino uses them since its a native OS X application.
Re:Competition is good (Score:2, Insightful)
I think the more appropriate statement is that OS X 10.2.8 doesn't support the current version of Safari.
Re:Competition is good (Score:1)
Why Mozilla (Gecko) or Opera (Presto) can run on 10.2.x? Ask yourself...
Veee-rry Smart answer .. (Score:3, Interesting)
open source == -0day!
I shall have to try Camino, but darnit, if it still takes forever to load and get itself started, its useless to me. web browsers need to open and close fast, on my system
Re:Veee-rry Smart answer .. (Score:4, Interesting)
Launch time is bandwidth-bound, so whichever one launches less wins. Unfortunately, Safari was crashing every month or two. FlamingCougar hasn't gone out once since I switched a few months ago *knock on space age composite*.
That was why I (somewhat reluctantly) switched, and extensions are why I'll never go back to Safari. Last time I used Camino (kept with it for about six months after Safari came out) it didn't support Mozilla or SmolderingChimp extensions. If that were to change some day, who knows?
Re:Veee-rry Smart answer .. (Score:1)
yeah, i'd work that way too, if suspend worked properly on my aging tiBook
be nice if there were a way to add 'proper suspend to disk and go to slee
OmniWeb (Score:5, Insightful)
The first commercial web browser, originally written for the platform the WWW was invented on, is still the best. OmniWeb has more features than any other browser.
I couldn't imagine using anything else, but if I had to use another browser, it would be FireFox. I don't care if my browser is integrated with Address Book. FireFox does almost everything OW does. Camino is stuck in a strange no-mans land, and with Safari out there, Camino will remain a nitch browser.
Safari is for average users. OmniWeb is for people that want amazing features. FireFox is for power users that want a free and open source browser. Camino just doesn't bring anything vital to the table.
Re:OmniWeb (Score:4, Insightful)
And I can't imagine paying for a browser... otherwise I'd be using Opera.
Re:OmniWeb (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you ever try using OmniWeb? Do you have any idea how many features have been packed into that little package?
Re:OmniWeb (Score:1)
Re:OmniWeb (Score:1)
Also what are you doing on mac/ mac community anyway?
Re:OmniWeb (Score:4, Insightful)
I strongly disagree. Camino is ideal for Mac users who want to have a pleasing, streamlined application but also need (or want) the features offered by Gecko. It's effectively the best of both worlds -- the power of the Mozilla-based rendering with the power of a native OS X application. Firefox (IMO) is just for Windows switchers who desperately need to have a familiar interface.
Of course, I definitely agree that OmniWeb trumps them all! (I've been using OW5 since the second beta back in February.)
Re:OmniWeb (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OmniWeb (Score:5, Informative)
As a licensed user since Omni beta 5 (now its final, doesn't crash) I smiled when I read it.
WE HAVE RSS! While browsing slashdot for instance, check that newspaper icon with "plus" on it, click, there, RSS. It sees RSS feed as a "dynamic bookmark folder", a perfect practical, simple thing.
Maybe Omni as a company tries to be nice to Apple but, dear Steve, Omni invented RSS feed sensing
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting quote on tabbed browsing (Score:4, Interesting)
I have to admit that I'm a tabbed browsing junkie now. I go absolutely nuts if I have to use someone else's computer that doesn't have a tabbed browser. It seems like such an insignificant little feature, but it really does add a lot to my browsing experience. I'm really glad it's in there now, but I still found that quote to be quite interesting. It seems that if you want to be on the cutting edge, you'd want to put in the features and let the users decide on whether it's useful or not.
Re:Interesting quote on tabbed browsing (Score:2, Interesting)
That's not what he meant. (Score:5, Informative)
What he was talking about is the "tab" paradigm used by OmniWeb 5.0. This paradigm doesn't actually use tabs at all; rather, it's a drawer filled with thumbnails of the sites on it. You can typically fit four or five thumbnails into the drawer before needing to scroll.
Very pretty, but not nearly as useful in the real world; the thumbnails add less than you'd think and there's even less room for sites in the drawer than there is on a toolbar. I'm glad that Camino went with actual tabs.
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:4, Insightful)
As opposed to the tendency of Camino or Safari to squish the tabs down until you can hardly read their titles? I'd much rather be able to scroll through my tabs (not to mention drag-n-drop to reorganize them!) than be forced to stick to a single order of tabs.
I was initially very dubious of OmniWeb's tabs, but after using them for a week or so I really started to see the benefits. You should give it another try.
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:2)
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:2)
What could be cool (warning : it is obvious, and discussed in public. No patent allowed
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:2)
In Safari, if you have two tabs open with similar names, it just shows the different sections.
There's a site I developed which uses some (perhaps excessively) descriptive page titles, and Safari works fine with it. For instance, the following page titles:
'Thingy Workgroup Site - Calendar for Smarch 2004'
'Thingy Workgroup Site - Advanced Search - User Profiles'
'Thingy Workgroup Site - A
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:2)
I've seen that behavior in firefox (I haven't used camino for a few versions), but after tabs stop fitting into the window, safari stops shrinking them. It puts a pop-down menu on the far right that contains any that didn't fit into the window.
Whether you think that's a better solution or not, it's what it actually does. Personally, I find it annoying for numbers of tabs slightly over what will fit, but much nicer if I grab a whole page of of thumbnails and open them at
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:2)
Re:That's not what he meant. (Score:2)
I Prefer Firefox (Score:4, Insightful)
I used to use Camino (Score:3, Insightful)
So atm, Im using Firefox with adblock. But Camino + adblock would be a dream setup.
Anyone know if it's possible?
Re:I used to use Camino (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I used to use Camino (Score:2)
Re:I used to use Camino (Score:2)
Safari No Timeout [macupdate.com]
I grabbed it about two weeks back and haven't had any issues, though I don't use Safari all that much.
p
Camino's biggest fault. (Score:5, Interesting)
FireFox is my day-to-day browser on OS X, and while there are some integration items I wish it had (like the integration with the Adress Book, the various Services like Grab, Mail, Speech, Summerize, and most importantly the Keychain), Camino has one major functionality lack which keeps me from running it -- no image blocking.
I can't understand why they haven't implemented this. It's in every other Gecko-based browser out there. I don't visit websites to see big flashing ads at the top and bottom of every page. I have better uses for my bandwidth.
FireFox has ad blocking. Camino doesn't. For this (and pretty much only this) reason, I'm not using Camino.
The day they implement ad blocking, I'll probably switch on my PowerBook.
Yaz.
Re:Camino's biggest fault. (Score:1)
Re:Camino's biggest fault. (Score:3, Interesting)
Because I want more control than that. And I don't want to have to edit CSS to get it.
Personally, I like that I can right-click on ads in FireFox to block or un-block them. There are some sites I permit ad-sized graphics from. There are others I kill as soon as I first visit them.
The CSS solutions are good if you don't have access to a better solution -- but with FireFox, I have access to a better solution :).
Otherwise, I really want to like Camino. While I don't use it extensively, I'd like to be ab
Re:Camino's biggest fault. (Score:2)
Right click? What's that?
I started using Camino when I got back into the mac world (10.1 days), after being utterly unimpressed with Mozilla, and hating the carbonlib ugliness that is IE.
I used it pretty much regularly until 10.3 came out, when I switched to Safari.
Firefox still is an abortion on the mac, although it's better than the old builds of Mozilla were. And I se
Re:Camino's biggest fault. (Score:2)
I know it's not strictly integrated, but you are aware of PithHelmet [culater.net] for Safari, right? It integrates seamlessly into Safari (only appears in the preferences pane and in the contextual menu 'right-click'). I'd be completely lost without it ...
Re:Camino's biggest fault. (Score:2)
For me the biggest fault are lacking certificate controls, i.e. the inability to install custom root CA's (except by creating a DB on Firefox and moving it to Camino's directory). When these are added, I'll drop Safari for Camino, but not before.
Preferably it should be done following Camino's "Mac-way" philosophy, which would mean using the certificates of X509Anchors system keychain instead of Mozilla's own cert.db.
Ad blocking == bad (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Ad blocking == bad (Score:2)
I just took soe time off my busy day to drop by and say: "Awwww".
I'm sorry, but I never gave you permission to use my bandwidth to send me ads. I don't have to consume them if I don't
Re:Ad blocking == bad (Score:1)
I'm sorry, but I never gave you permission to use my bandwidth to send me ads.
Cry me a river, yourself. You would prefer to pay for content how? He's talking about Google ads. Are you really trying to claim that they seriously impact your bandwidth allotment? Obviously you browse the web with images turned off, otherwise you wouldn't even slightly have a point. Do you really need blocking for text ads as well?
25kb? C'mon, give me a break (Score:2)
One of which is a persistently cached 13kb image, which is loaded once and never again, per my apache setup.
You don't wanna look at my ads? Thats fine. You have the choice of not visitng my site, or hell, if you're one of those people who don't mind donating, then block my ads, but my problem is that people expect to get quality content for free, then wanna block the ads that pay for it. I'm a member of a stuggling family, using free AOL disks to keep my website u
Re:25kb? C'mon, give me a break (Score:2)
First off, I'm not now, nor have I ever been a visitor to your website. So I haven't cost you anything.
However, ad blockers are a part of the business of the web, and if you can't make sufficient money off your website through them, you need to stop blaming the visitors who block your ads and look for a different source of income.
It's just like when Ted Turner a a year or so back claimed you were stealing if you didn't sit down and watch the advertisements on his channels. Do you sit through and watch e
Re:Ad blocking == bad (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, because you live in some magickal world where the browser fairy takes you to unwanted sites and fills your screen with advertisements.
Er, rather, you requested content from a site that looked like:
GET
And it gave you page.html and all that it entails. So, at least from a httpd server point of view, you did request the advertisements.
Re:Ad blocking == bad (Score:2)
Your own argument works completely against you.
An HTML file contains no bitmap data -- it merely links to it. If I ask for "page.html", I expect to get a text file called "page.html". This is how HTTP is designed to work, and is indeed how it works virtually everywhere.
Your browser has to
Re:Ad blocking == bad (Score:2)
You mean he uses IE on a PC?
Firefox can be ugly on OS X (Score:2, Redundant)
Firefox is obviously not an OS X application. Sure, they have Gecko running really quickly, but non-native widgets? One of the big draws of OS X is the look and feel, and the consistency of the looks. Having what looks to be Windows-themed widget
but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:but... (Score:3, Informative)
Camino + Japanese = still sucking (Score:4, Interesting)
It's a shame because I'd rather use Camino than Firefox. Firefox doesn't use native widgets and still doesn't really look & feel like a fully OS X "native" application (although they're really doing their best to get closer).
Re:Camino + Japanese = still sucking (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Camino + Japanese = still sucking (Score:2)
Camino Localization project (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually They're All Good ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Actually They're All Good ... (Score:2)
Re:Actually They're All Good ... (Score:1)
Re:Actually They're All Good ... (Score:2)
Slow development (no more?) (Score:3, Interesting)
But now 0.8 and 0.8.1 have dropped, and I'm using Camino again - at least for the time being.
Hopefully development will remain steady.
Re:Firefox is the best (Score:5, Informative)
Pinkerton discusses the "why Camino instead of Firefox" issue:
p
Re:Firefox is the best (Score:4, Informative)
Camino is playing catch-up with more than just Safari...
Re:Firefox is the best (Score:2, Insightful)
The fact that Camino exists and a lot of people use it and like it doesn't mean that those who want / need the extra features of Firefox can't use them.
Unfortunately, even some basic features aren't available yet for Firefox on OS X. For instance, it's currently impossible to open a downloaded file because most of the applicati
Re:Firefox is the best (Score:2, Interesting)
I started using Camino (Chimera, at the time) when I got sick of OmniWeb (version 0.5, maybe?) and switched from Camino to Firefox in order to see what all the hype was about. I've downloaded updates as they came out but haven't really given them much of a chance. I simply didn't see any reason to do so.
Finally, I've gotten them. Thanks for the quote.
I heart Camino (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I heart Camino (Score:3, Interesting)
2)I don't think safari or firefox does this either.
3)As far as i know, none of the major browsers do this (IE, Mozilla or Safari) 'right out of the box'. In safari you enable the debug menu, and mozilla/firefox require an extension.
Re:I heart Camino (Score:1)
I have a to-do list served off my iMac (well i did before i took it in to get the screen fix0red
-Leigh
Re:I heart Camino (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Safari does, actually, but who cares. We're talking about Camino. I would like for camino to be useful browsing scads of text files. It would just be more useful that way. There should at least be a "hidden pref" for this feature, but I can't find any information about it. Seems like it would be frightfully easy to implement
Re:I heart Camino (Score:2)
They shouldn't do it. What would be the point of user-agent strings if they were not accurate?
Re:I heart Camino (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Firefox is the best (Score:5, Interesting)
Firefox's button defaults look like ass. It has a lot of other, better features, but the UI isn't really one of them.
Now Adblock.......
Try this, perhaps (Score:3, Interesting)
Not perfect but getting warmer.