Thread
System 6 Browser Development Opinions
What I mean is, is there a file area, or place to put attachments on this site?Avoid sarcasm at all costs.
Oh...
Contact an admin about hosting it at 68kmla.org/files
Otherwise PM me.
Contact an admin about hosting it at 68kmla.org/files
Otherwise PM me.
and if u still don't get any satisfaction porter, I will host your file on my gopher site no probs! pm me. - too [8D]
I'd love to do some artwork, icons etc. Just let me know.
Currently the artwork in the project consists of exactly one icon, the program icon. You are welcome to post the derez output for an icon and mask, ICN# and I'll have a look. At the moment there no need for a colour icon.
Does that mean there is actually something to publish? (Question asked first by a Mac Plus who so much want to get online and see what the wild web is like…)
No it's not in a usable state, but I think it would be worth publishing a snapshot of the source just to prove that something does exist.
Ok, thanks!
Still so happy and impressed that one guy alone took the time to write a System 6 browser in a couple of monthes… in 2008! :b&w:
Still so happy and impressed that one guy alone took the time to write a System 6 browser in a couple of monthes… in 2008! :b&w:
Of course. Is there any need for a splash or about screen? Photoshop is quite ready. I'll see if I can get around to making the icons sometime today.
Aargh! No, avast ye demons! Splash screens are a hideous waste of resource and time, you have a slow machine and slow startup, so what do you do, slow it down with a big kludgy graphic that requires all other applications to do a repaint when it disappears. No, I think splash screens in general are bad.
If the problem is slow application startup, speed up the start up, or omit steps and do then asynchronously or later.
Phtotoshop? Um, we're on a 4Mb classic running at 8Mhz and black and white. ResEdit, and MacPaint at a push, are the most you would need.
The about screen already meets the Human Interface Guide lines, it says who, what and when. It's done by a resource driven dialog, no code changes required.
Well I was thinking o' dithering a full color Icon I could make, but I'll do it all in ResEdit I suppose.
And YOU are on a 4MB classic. All I'm armed with is a 2.5MB Plus and a 2MB SE. If you want me to do some hosting for you PM me and I'll give you my email so you can send it to me and I'll upload it.
And YOU are on a 4MB classic. All I'm armed with is a 2.5MB Plus and a 2MB SE. If you want me to do some hosting for you PM me and I'll give you my email so you can send it to me and I'll upload it.
@tm
2mb and 2.5mb ram?
buy some more ram ya scrooge ; - ) [
] ]'>
2mb and 2.5mb ram?
buy some more ram ya scrooge ; - ) [
] ]'>
So where is this software currently hosted? Or is it still so unusable that it is not yet available?
It definitely qualifies as unusable to the lay person, however somebody of a more technical bent would be able to see that a number of major components are present.
I'll post when I've put it somewhere.
What I meant was will it have the ability to turn off images in html?
As in make it text only? It could be done.
However, I was not intending having a preferences dialog with forty eight tabbed pages adorned with three hundred checkbox options that nobody has any idea what they do.
@ porter: if I may ask, what are your goals with that project? I mean, in the short, medium and long terms? It all depends in the amount of time you'll be able to dedicate to the project in the next few months, but is it a one-shot project, or do you you plan to develop it further over time?
What you could eventually do, if it does exist, is share your roadmap with us. A 1.0 release doesn't need all the features people request. But maybe, with any luck and if you have the time to do it, a version 2.0 could be planned with some more features according to some requests you'll get from the community.
Anyway, a very simple inline text browser with the ability to follow links, basic html parsing and the ability to download/display images would be REALLY AWESOME! Thanks again in advance.
What you could eventually do, if it does exist, is share your roadmap with us. A 1.0 release doesn't need all the features people request. But maybe, with any luck and if you have the time to do it, a version 2.0 could be planned with some more features according to some requests you'll get from the community.
Anyway, a very simple inline text browser with the ability to follow links, basic html parsing and the ability to download/display images would be REALLY AWESOME! Thanks again in advance.
Sorry, maybe my lack of english vocabulary didn't allow me to clearly express what I meant. But neither Lynx nor Wannabe can run under System 6, right? That's just the point of the future Browser6, to fill this gap and allow older Macs to discover the wild web at last!
What I want to do is
1. create a useable browser, eg see HTML with GIF graphics, follow HTTP links, and enter simple forms.
2. that works on System 6 on a lowly 68000, hence no Color QuickDraw
3. using programming technology that existed back then, hence THINK C5.0 or early MPW.
4. using the interface guidelines of the day, no balloon help, AppleGuide etc.
So it is intended to be a retro "what could have been done back then" type of project.
Once I've achieved those goals it will be published as an Open Source Project for people to do as they will, ideally following the original intent.
Of course what would be nice also is for it to cross compile and work on Windows 3.1, but that's another story.
No, it wasn't you....it was my lack of making the connection or knowing about the requirements of the two browsers mentioned. In short, /me fail. :ISorry, maybe my lack of english vocabulary didn't allow me to clearly express what I meant. But neither Lynx nor Wannabe can run under System 6, right? That's just the point of the future Browser6, to fill this gap and allow older Macs to discover the wild web at last!
I know it sounds obvious, but could you include notes that describe which switches are required for whatever compiler. Possibly a description of the system configuration on which it compiled for you? We've all created code that "works for me".
I was actually hoping for a 3000 line plain text config file
I will include a THINK C 5.0 project file and an MPW build script. The MPW build script should contain all the information you need if you don't have THINK C 5.0.
@porter: I have the icons made, PM will be sent ASAP.
I also think we need a different name.
Like... BeigeFox, or something.
Also, it would be uber cool if someone adapted the engine to have a facebook or other social networking client.
Also, Browser6 should be able to show and open documents from the user's hard drive so there would be no need for jumping to and from the finder. In fact, the boot disk wouldn't need a finder (good for floppy only surfin').
Like... BeigeFox, or something.
Also, it would be uber cool if someone adapted the engine to have a facebook or other social networking client.
Also, Browser6 should be able to show and open documents from the user's hard drive so there would be no need for jumping to and from the finder. In fact, the boot disk wouldn't need a finder (good for floppy only surfin').
I agree to the name issue. Porter, are you open to suggestions? Browser6, imho, is efficient but not particularily sexy. The 68rowse someone suggested earlier I find much more appealing.
It's a "What colour to make the bicycle shed issue", what name you make the filename of the executable does not change the functionality, and you can change the name with point, click and type. I care not what you call it.
I have the names of my source code, data structures and functions and that's what I work with, if somebody renames the application to "Le petite fromage" it doesn't affect me.
Not that it matters but I actually think "Browser6" (or whatever it is) is an appropriate, straight-forward name that says what it is and what it does. 68rowse just kind of sounds weird, and it's a bit misleading in that it makes you think it is the most appropriate option across the board, when there may be more appropriate options for other types of 68ks.
Also, it sounds very awkward in English. [] ]'>
Anyway -- that's all I have to say about that.
Also, it sounds very awkward in English. [
] ]'>Anyway -- that's all I have to say about that.
I have to agree. "Browser6" does roll off the tongue nicely.Not that it matters but I actually think "Browser6" (or whatever it is) is an appropriate, straight-forward name that says what it is and what it does. 68rowse just kind of sounds weird, and it's a bit misleading in that it makes you think it is the most appropriate option across the board, when there may be more appropriate options for other types of 68ks.
Also, it sounds very awkward in English. [
Anyway -- that's all I have to say about that.