[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
RE: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: "Darran D. Rimron" ####@####.#### Date: 1 Mar 2000 17:24:25 -0000 Message-Id: <NCBBLCEDENCINNMFNPBCMEIGEGAA.darran@rimron.co.uk> {cross posted to relevent person and the NanoGUI list] > -----Original Message----- > I think a more direct C/C++ implementation would be > a better way to go. Especially when some of the ports > are targeting low 2-4MB memory machines. As much as I > hate to admit it, Pocket IE rocks on my 2Meg SH3 40MHz. IIRC, there was a Opera port in progress using MWIN/NanoGUI -- but I don't know if they plan to cover LinuxCE too. -Darran | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: "The Joker" ####@####.#### Date: 1 Mar 2000 21:20:07 -0000 Message-Id: <049101bf83c2$c2f08560$f5089fc3@joker.crusaders.no> >> I think a more direct C/C++ implementation would be >> a better way to go. Especially when some of the ports >> are targeting low 2-4MB memory machines. As much as I >> hate to admit it, Pocket IE rocks on my 2Meg SH3 40MHz. > >IIRC, there was a Opera port in progress using MWIN/NanoGUI -- but I >don't know if they plan to cover LinuxCE too. If we had a LinuxCE computer around, I can't see why this shouldn't be possible. Both opera and nano-X are so portable that it would be little painful to manage this. Of course, I would have to make sure this first version get 100% completed first. I will put a lot of effort in it the next following weeks, and it will be finished soon. Thanks to Morten, it looks REALLY nice :) -Richard | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: "Greg Haerr" ####@####.#### Date: 2 Mar 2000 06:18:53 -0000 Message-Id: <020001bf840d$70562bc0$15320cd0@gregh> : If we had a LinuxCE computer around, I can't see why this shouldn't be : possible. Both opera and nano-X are so portable that it would be little : painful to manage this. As I mentioned on one of the lists, there's no difference between Nano-X on Linux and LinuxCE, both use the kernel framebuffer. Of course, I would have to make sure this first : version get 100% completed first. I will put a lot of effort in it the next : following weeks, and it will be finished soon. Thanks to Morten, it looks : REALLY nice :) BTW, are you using the 16bpp alpha blend stuff and the anti-aliased fonts? Regards, Greg | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: [linuxce-devel] Browser...
From: Richard Kvalsvik ####@####.#### Date: 2 Mar 2000 10:57:30 -0000 Message-Id: <38BE45FD.82831EA1@crusaders.no> > As I mentioned on one of the lists, there's no difference between Nano-X > on Linux and LinuxCE, both use the kernel framebuffer. Then it all remains on adjusting for that kernel, can't see why it shouldn't work. > BTW, are you using the 16bpp alpha blend stuff and the anti-aliased fonts? At this moment, the fonts are not implemented, but soon it will be. It is neccesary for a proper browser to work as it really should. -- Richard Kvalsvik -Developer at Opera Software | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>] |