Browser Choice

tigger4046 · 28th September 2007, 07:24

Did install on my IE browser, but will we have the option for additional browser selections such as FireFox or Helix?

YtseJam · 28th September 2007, 08:03

So you put up a browser like AOL Helix, but you forget about the real 3rd alternative brower Opera? Living in a bubble are we... sigh...

flocksoft · 28th September 2007, 10:18

this poll is useful only for statistical purpose

because from Official Wishlist:
Option to use Mozilla (or other default browser) for Now Playing
Not going to happen according to the devs.

Saffari? too bugs so far
AOL Helix? it's Internet Explorer-based (at least, I think so...)

@YtseJam
I agree

Sawg · 28th September 2007, 14:24

And until throws browsers come built into Windows, I really wouldn't expect it. IE has built in controls allowing any Windows program to use it, the other browsers do not.

CraigF · 28th September 2007, 15:06

What your asking for is for Winamp to come bundled with one of, or all of Gecko, WebCore, Presto or maybe KHTML.

You'd think there would be a lot of overhead in doing that. And guess what? There is.

Not. Going. To. Happen.

The only other option is if those runtimes start installing themselves on a system level, with availability for use inside other applications in the same way as IE's Trident.
Last I checked, Gecko was the only one thinking of doing this, and that plan was long since scrapped.

Omega X · 28th September 2007, 21:15

I thought that I answered this already...somewhere.

@ CraigF

IT wasn't exactly scrapped. It was kind of pushed back into the Mozilla2 framework plans.

CraigF · 1st October 2007, 14:01

Please offer links to back that up, because from what I have gathered, XULRunner is the current focus.

hannes · 1st October 2007, 19:43

I agree with YtseJam. Where's Opera??

pjn123 · 1st October 2007, 22:15

Yes! Where is OPERA!!!

retchless · 1st October 2007, 23:31

Why though? Sure you get fewer CSS bugs with firefox, but that's a non-issue for any competant web developer... Winamp uses its own browser controls, so that's not any reason to use firefox... Sure you can play the security card, but honestly, Firefox has security vulnerabilities too.. Such is the nature of the web. I love Firefox. It's absolutely the best browser available.. and I realize that people want choice, but is choice really worth the overhead? Maybe... but I don't care.. and neither does the average joe i'm afraid.

iron2000 · 3rd October 2007, 03:56

To me browser choices shouldn't be priority as Winamp is a media player. I don't surf using Winamp.

CraigF · 3rd October 2007, 16:19

Pointless discussion anyway, because its not happening for technical reasons that are a long way from being rectified, if ever.

Brian P · 3rd October 2007, 19:52

I like how the question asked is "Should Winamp Support other Browsers?" but the option "No" is suspiciously missing.

I, for one, would like the devs to concentrate on fixing bugs and adding USEFUL features to Winamp, rather than bothing to integrate various browsers into a program that, frankly, has no business being used as a web browser anyway.

PS: Opera 4life.

Omega X · 3rd October 2007, 22:44

Quote:

Originally posted by CraigF
Please offer links to back that up, because from what I have gathered, XULRunner is the current focus.

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_2

soulstace · 3rd October 2007, 23:16

@hannes
@YtseJam

How are you going to embed a third party browser that is not open source into Winamp?

Winamp would actually have to launch an instance of Opera.exe

It doesn't have to do this with Internet Explorer because IE has controls available (as Sawg already mentioned).

hannes · 4th October 2007, 02:10

@soulstace

I also think that its pointless supporting or including another browser in winamp, IE is fine for that.

But if you're just mentioning browsers to support, the best one around should be mentioned along with them!

CraigF · 4th October 2007, 15:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Omega X
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_2

Nothing in that brief makes mention to systemwide-installation of the Mozilla runtimes. Unless I am missing something, I'm still led to believe that Mozilla are not moving to a systemwide distribution akin to Java/.NET, meaning that Winamp would still have to distribute its own copy of the runtime vastly increasing bloat.

Omega X · 4th October 2007, 19:46

Quote:

Originally posted by CraigF
Nothing in that brief makes mention to systemwide-installation of the Mozilla runtimes. Unless I am missing something, I'm still led to believe that Mozilla are not moving to a systemwide distribution akin to Java/.NET, meaning that Winamp would still have to distribute its own copy of the runtime vastly increasing bloat.

No, they said that they did not want to do that. But they did say that they wanted XULRunner apps to share runtime instead of opening up separate versions unless it was specifically necessary do to so. However I do not know if that is still in the plans. There are also plans on that page for embedding a la IE(which is why I linked it).

mikm · 4th October 2007, 21:37

Why doesn't anybody care about lynx? I refuse to use Winamp until the developers stop all their work to make lynx an option for the browser.

CraigF · 5th October 2007, 10:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Omega X
No, they said that they did not want to do that. But they did say that they wanted XULRunner apps to share runtime instead of opening up separate versions unless it was specifically necessary do to so. However I do not know if that is still in the plans. There are also plans on that page for embedding a la IE(which is why I linked it).

Perhaps, but this isn't an embedding issue. Winamp COULD embed gecko right now if it wanted to, the issue is that it would have to distribute it too (which is where the bloat comes in).

The issue is distribution, it WOULD be plausible if Mozilla were distributing, and installing system-wide. Then Winamp could just detect it were installed and offer an option to the user at that time, without worrying about distribution/packaging.

Omega X · 5th October 2007, 18:28

Quote:

Originally posted by CraigF
Perhaps, but this isn't an embedding issue. Winamp COULD embed gecko right now if it wanted to, the issue is that it would have to distribute it too (which is where the bloat comes in).

The issue is distribution, it WOULD be plausible if Mozilla were distributing, and installing system-wide. Then Winamp could just detect it were installed and offer an option to the user at that time, without worrying about distribution/packaging.

I know what you are saying. I said it last time in a different thread that adding Gecko as the browser in Winamp would add bloat.

But the embedding in Mozilla2 is the system wide thing that you are talking about(in the wiki page). But the problem would still be distribution since Microsoft won't install Firefox in their OS by default. And since Mozilla won't do separate Gecko framework distribution. It would take the person to download a future version of Firefox or similar Gecko based installs to get that embedded Mozilla2 functionality.

View Poll Results: Should Winamp Support other Browsers?
Internet Explorer	5	11.63%
FireFox	29	67.44%
AoL Helix	1	2.33%
Saffari	0	0%
Other	8	18.60%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

28th September 2007, 07:24	#1
tigger4046 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Lakeland, FL Posts: 1	Browser Choice Did install on my IE browser, but will we have the option for additional browser selections such as FireFox or Helix?

28th September 2007, 14:24	#4
Sawg Forum King Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,456	And until throws browsers come built into Windows, I really wouldn't expect it. IE has built in controls allowing any Windows program to use it, the other browsers do not. \| Brought to you by ^V ^C \| The one... the original... no seriously!

1st October 2007, 19:43	#8
hannes Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: NZ Posts: 71	I agree with YtseJam. Where's Opera?? http://www.hannesnz-software.com

1st October 2007, 22:15	#9
pjn123 Major Dude Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: /\/¯¯¯¯¯\/\ , South-Africa Posts: 1,030	Yes! Where is OPERA!!! ClassicPro© v2.01 : This plugin allows you to use cPro skins in Winamp. ClassicPro skins are all SUI skins and loads very quickly. ClassicPro skins is even easier to skin than Winamp Classic skins. A new layout have been added since version 2. Download ClassicPro© ==== cPro Skins ==== ClassicPro© Homepage ==== SC Forums

28th September 2007, 08:03	#2
YtseJam Forum King Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Israel Posts: 2,398	So you put up a browser like AOL Helix, but you forget about the real 3rd alternative brower Opera? Living in a bubble are we... sigh...

28th September 2007, 10:18	#3
flocksoft Major Dude Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Italy Posts: 695	this poll is useful only for statistical purpose because from Official Wishlist: Option to use Mozilla (or other default browser) for Now Playing Not going to happen according to the devs. Saffari? too bugs so far AOL Helix? it's Internet Explorer-based (at least, I think so...) @YtseJam I agree

28th September 2007, 15:06	#5
CraigF Passionately Apathetic Administrator Join Date: May 2000 Location: Hell Posts: 5,435	What your asking for is for Winamp to come bundled with one of, or all of Gecko, WebCore, Presto or maybe KHTML. You'd think there would be a lot of overhead in doing that. And guess what? There is. Not. Going. To. Happen. The only other option is if those runtimes start installing themselves on a system level, with availability for use inside other applications in the same way as IE's Trident. Last I checked, Gecko was the only one thinking of doing this, and that plan was long since scrapped.

28th September 2007, 21:15	#6
Omega X Forum King Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: A Parallel Dimension Posts: 2,253	I thought that I answered this already...somewhere. @ CraigF IT wasn't exactly scrapped. It was kind of pushed back into the Mozilla2 framework plans.

1st October 2007, 14:01	#7
CraigF Passionately Apathetic Administrator Join Date: May 2000 Location: Hell Posts: 5,435	Please offer links to back that up, because from what I have gathered, XULRunner is the current focus.

1st October 2007, 23:31	#10
retchless Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 97	Why though? Sure you get fewer CSS bugs with firefox, but that's a non-issue for any competant web developer... Winamp uses its own browser controls, so that's not any reason to use firefox... Sure you can play the security card, but honestly, Firefox has security vulnerabilities too.. Such is the nature of the web. I love Firefox. It's absolutely the best browser available.. and I realize that people want choice, but is choice really worth the overhead? Maybe... but I don't care.. and neither does the average joe i'm afraid.

3rd October 2007, 03:56	#11
iron2000 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 391	To me browser choices shouldn't be priority as Winamp is a media player. I don't surf using Winamp. Thanx

3rd October 2007, 16:19	#12
CraigF Passionately Apathetic Administrator Join Date: May 2000 Location: Hell Posts: 5,435	Pointless discussion anyway, because its not happening for technical reasons that are a long way from being rectified, if ever.

3rd October 2007, 19:52	#13
Brian P Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 10	I like how the question asked is "Should Winamp Support other Browsers?" but the option "No" is suspiciously missing. I, for one, would like the devs to concentrate on fixing bugs and adding USEFUL features to Winamp, rather than bothing to integrate various browsers into a program that, frankly, has no business being used as a web browser anyway. PS: Opera 4life.

3rd October 2007, 23:16	#15
soulstace Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 116	@hannes @YtseJam How are you going to embed a third party browser that is not open source into Winamp? Winamp would actually have to launch an instance of Opera.exe It doesn't have to do this with Internet Explorer because IE has controls available (as Sawg already mentioned).

4th October 2007, 02:10	#16
hannes Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: NZ Posts: 71	@soulstace I also think that its pointless supporting or including another browser in winamp, IE is fine for that. But if you're just mentioning browsers to support, the best one around should be mentioned along with them! http://www.hannesnz-software.com

4th October 2007, 21:37	#19
mikm Major Dude Join Date: May 2001 Location: somewhere else Posts: 1,286	Why doesn't anybody care about lynx? I refuse to use Winamp until the developers stop all their work to make lynx an option for the browser. powered by C₈H₁₀N₄O₂

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode