Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Galeon crossing usability threshold

By kmself in Internet
Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 01:17:40 AM EST
Tags: Software (all tags)
Software

Galeon is a lightweight, simple, and fast browser based on the Mozilla Gecko rendering engine. The projects goal is succinct: "Galeon aims to utilize the simplest interface possible for a browser". Though still in development, Galeon is rapidly crossing the usability threshold to become a viable browsing alternative. And Galeon rocks!


As I run Debian, I added the /etc/apt/sources.list lines suggested. apt-get install galeon fetches and installs. I did run the galeonclean utility to prep my environment -- there are interaction effects with Mozilla, most strongly negative. You may have to (re)move your ~/.mozilla directory. RedHat and other users are also supported in the INSTALL documentation. Both Mozilla and GNOME are required for library support, though neither need actually (dis)grace your screen to use Galeon.

What I like about Galeon: it's fast, light, clean, and provides both a sane configuration and sane configuration options, much in the precise way that Netscape and Mozilla do not. This is user software, not corporate software. Browsers since NS/IE 3.x have been strongly influenced by the needs and desires of commercial web interests, sacrificing both usability and privacy concerns of users. I'm thoroughly sick of this.

There's odd stuff missing -- Galeon doesn't have cookie controls -- I suspect the assumption is that this is handled at another layer, in my case Junkbuster. There are image-download options (images from same server only -- which incidentally breaks more sites than you'd imagine). Mail is through the agent of your choice (about time!), ditto Usenet. The topper is a zoom spinner on the toolbar -- for websites with broken fonts and/or image maps, you can zoom in or out to an appropriate size for viewing. Very easily. Re-rendering is fast (thank Gecko for that). For those who don't like animated gifs, you can run James Vasile's Gif Animation Toggle (gat) against the file components/libnsgif.so under the Mozilla tree.

Galeon has bugs. There is a dialog-popup-when-editing-text thing which is really annoying. It does fall over. Fairly frequently. However, it also has an option to restore state -- you don't lose much, if anything. Documentation could use help, particularly for issues such as configuring X resources and the like. On balance of merits, I've dropped Mozilla from my WindowMaker dock and, may opt out of Netscape shortly as well.

What I'm contending is that Galeon has begun to cross the line from developer-ware to at least nominally-useful geek-ware. I wouldn't recommend it to the general public, but I'd give it a strong thumbs-up to technically minded folks who have been severly disappointed by current browser alternatives.

And for those who don't want to deal with Mozilla, GNOME, and other overhead, there are yet more alternatives, including Skipstone, Armadillo, and BrowseX, or hit Freshmeat which lists 24 projects.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Your favorite browser
o MS IE 1-4 0%
o MS IE 5 28%
o Netscape 1-4 15%
o Mozilla / Netscape 6 18%
o Konqueror, kfm, Gnome Help Browser 2%
o Opera 6%
o lynx, w3m, links, telnet 80 22%
o Other 4%

Votes: 192
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Freshmeat
o Galeon
o INSTALL
o Junkbuster
o Gif Animation Toggle
o Skipstone
o Armadillo
o BrowseX
o Freshmeat [2]
o Also by kmself


Display: Sort:
Galeon crossing usability threshold | 31 comments (25 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden)
Galeon / Mozilla, vs... (3.66 / 9) (#4)
by pb on Thu Oct 05, 2000 at 03:10:49 PM EST

I think this is a pretty useful topic of discussion, since all I want is a graphical, non-bloated, stable web browser, and so far I haven't found one.

Galeon and Mozilla (use the latest night build, *not* a Netscape Preview Release) both fit the first two, IMO. Mozilla's extra features are fairly useful, except for that sidebar that I always turn OFF. I especially like the Image and Cookie management options. I'd like to have more of those, but I can always use Junkbuster instead if I have to. Also, Galeon's Opera-like *zoom* feature is really handy. And kfm is a pretty snappy light-weight browser too, I just can't remember what it didn't do at the moment.

However, whenever they crash, I get annoyed and try out some other browsers. w3m is equally good because it's non-bloated and stable; it supports the necessary features without having too much feeping creaturism, it just isn't graphical.

For those who are interested, I've managed to install and run IE3 for Win 3.1 under Wine with no hassles, and I've managed to run IE4 (already installed) under Wine from a Windows partition with some hassles. For you IE freaks out there, it can be done. Almost. Incidentally, IE blows chunks under Solaris and HP/UX, if you can get it to run; this is probably because they use MainWin. I expect that an MS port to Linux would be of similar (bad) quality, except that it'll probably never happen.

Incidentally, if anyone finds a browser that seems to fit all three requirements, let me know! I'll try it out... Heck, I'll have to try those listed alternatives now, too. :)
---
"See what the drooling, ravening, flesh-eating hordes^W^W^W^WKuro5hin.org readers have to say."
-- pwhysall
Re: Opera (3.00 / 6) (#21)
by Garc on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 11:17:02 AM EST

Since you mentioned Opera, I decided I should include a link for those people who have never heard of it. Yes, there is also a linux version.

garc
--
Tomorrow is going to be wonderful because tonight I do not understand anything. -- Niels Bohr
[ Parent ]
Re: Galeon / Mozilla, vs... (3.00 / 1) (#31)
by nytehorse on Tue Oct 10, 2000 at 07:47:47 AM EST

You seem to have hit upon the "Rule of 3" - here it is, essentially (although I'm probably mangling it):

You can have it cheap, fast, and really nicely done. But you can only pick 2 of these three options... if it's going to be done right, it'll be expensive or it'll take forever. If it's done cheap, it could get out the door quickly but it'll suck. You get the idea...

Personally, barring JavaScript problems, Konqueror works great for me. Problem: You have to install a recent KDE2 beta build to get it. Pro: It kicks EVERYTHING else's ass (except wrt java/javascript, but it's being worked on).

Konqueror!

Chris Lee
Programmer
AZ Sites, LLC
http://www.azsites.com
[ Parent ]

Well. (none / 0) (#32)
by Dolgan on Tue Dec 26, 2000 at 11:32:42 AM EST

Recent Mozilla builds have proven to be much more stable.

I can't really find anything good about Galeon.

[ Parent ]

Advertisements on Kuro5hin (2.61 / 21) (#5)
by bjk4 on Thu Oct 05, 2000 at 05:05:44 PM EST

There are only a few types of articles that really irk me on Kuro5hin. One of those types are advertisements.

Not all advertisements are written by marketing drones or by developers of the product. They can be generated by faithful fans who try to spread their favorite technological tool. On Kuro5hin, a regular advertisement wouldn't last a second -- people sniff out marketing types and shoo them away.

Unfortunately, one type of advertisement remains that sneaks by many of us because it is enticing. It begins with a question: What is better, HURD or Linux. It compares and contrasts the benefits of cookie management and details what features are present or missing. Often the author's opinion on the user interface surface up in the mix.

In the end, you find a well written discussion on why a single person likes a certain product. Aren't these called testimonials?

Personally, I'd like to see discussions about new ideas and new, broad technologies, not just their implementations. I'd like to hear about the Hopfield neural network that can identify spoken words -- what are the implications of these? Will information desks go out of business because of this technology? Discuss!

Advertisement? (3.09 / 11) (#8)
by rusty on Thu Oct 05, 2000 at 06:22:14 PM EST

I think someone's a wee bit paranoid. This was what I'd have called a "software review." He introduced the application, said how it works, what was good, what was bad. Where's the harm in any of this? The conclusion was "I like Galeon." Just because he likes it doesn't make this an ad or a testimonial.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Why I advertised Galeon at K5 (4.77 / 9) (#13)
by kmself on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 12:51:14 AM EST

Software review. Ad. Whatever.

If I wanted to sell you something, I'd point you to OpenSales, tell you about our pimp-ass ecommerce applications, have you sign for a $100k deployment contract, and tell you you're getting a bargain at twice the price.

Sure, I'm selling Galeon. Evangelizing it. Whatever. I don't know the developers, am not attached to the project, and am not benefitting directly from it. But there's a reason, and it's hinted at in my article. I'll highlight for the contextually impaired:

Browser development since NS/IE 3.x has been strongly influenced by the desires and wishes of commercial web interests, sacrificing both usability and privacy concerns of end users. I'm thoroughly sick of this.

What distinguishes Galeon from other alternatives (Armadillo, BrowserX) is that it starts from one of the commercial darlings -- Mozilla / Netscape 6, and procedes to strip away a bunch of cruft (granted, while layering on a bunch of Gnome dependencies), as well as adding a few highly useful functions (the zoom spinner, preference dialogs far superior to Netscape) which are sorely lacking in available Linux browsers. Again, let me emphasize:

Galeon is taking the core Mozilla engines and steering the project in a direction favored by developers and end-users, not corporate interests. This is made possible by the open-source nature of Mozilla, and represents one of the extremely powerful democratizing principles of free software. The Mozilla project can ignore this statement, but it does so at its own risk.

Free software is empowering. It's a revolutionary concept. I could smoke dope, wear dreads, and write a 12,000 word screed telling you how your minds will be blown in this amazing future that lies before you, or I can point you to a present day example and provide some install hints. So I'm doing some virtual pavement pounding on behalf of Galeon. I think it's a very cool, and very important, concept. I did the same for K5 when it first emerged. I'll do it for other good ideas I see. Why? Because I like the power that these tools give, and the way they make the world more interesting for me, and hopefully you.

Galeon rocks...your world.

--
Karsten M. Self
SCO -- backgrounder on Caldera/SCO vs IBM
Support the EFF!!
There is no K5 cabal.
[ Parent ]

Not that good (4.10 / 10) (#7)
by Dolgan on Thu Oct 05, 2000 at 06:08:51 PM EST

[Feel free to delete the first duplicate. I did preview, but something happened beforeI hit post...]

I personally can't say I like Galeon that much. I like <a href="ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/nightly/latest">Mozilla nightlies better:

Galeon doesn't save cookies. It forgets them on exit. Being less anal than some, I accept and save all cookies. But Galeon forgetting them is quite irritating. Do the developers even know about this?

It doesn't let you disable keep-alive like you can in Mozilla, so Junkbuster doesn't work right with it for me without a tiny bit of outside tweaking. This will be fixed in 0.7.7 though.

I'm not sure if this is unique to me (my theme?) or what, but the bookmarks menu is really ugly. It's spacey. After each bookmarks, there's a new line and it's really enormous because of it. Gross.

Another I have is that the thing is as stable as a 97 year old lady on one foot (for me). Not only does it crash on exit (when you close it, it segfaults -- I believe this is unique to me, for the most part), but it crashes probably twice as much as Mozilla for me (which rarely crashes). It doesn't take much, and the crashes are mostly random AFAICT.

Finally, I don't really see the advantages of Galeon over Mozilla. I understand them, but I don't see them happening on my system. Pages render fast in Mozilla nightlies, and the menus are fast enough for me to tolerate it now. Why would I want this Galeon, Ms. "Mozilla But Uglier" BitchToCompile, when I can just run Mozilla which is doing me more than fine?

I think Galeon's usefulness is running out. It could just be on my system, but if you're having problems with Mozilla I recommend checking out a recent M18 nightly and compiling it with --disable-debug, --enable-optimizations and --disable-mailnews. Ta da. It's wonderful.

As a side note, I am currently running a binary from mozilla.org of the latest nightly and it's considerably slower than my compiled version of the night before. So if you're running pre-compiled binaries, maybe try compiling it with t he above options.

Re: Not that good (3.11 / 9) (#10)
by tokage on Thu Oct 05, 2000 at 06:57:46 PM EST

Yeah but if I'm not mistaken, they're both alpha software. I know galeon is, it's only been around a few months. That's like saying "oh i dont like mozilla because IE is faster" when it's obvious ie has had a lot more development/testing/etc. If you read my comment, you'll see some reasons I like it, despite it being hard to get running(two comments above yours). I didn't know about --disable-mailnews though, that's a good thing, one of the major things that irks me about mozilla. In any event, we still have a while to go before browers on *nix platforms are as polished as Internet Exploder(tm) The Man

I always play / Russian roulette in my head / It's 17 black, or 29 red
[ Parent ]

Re: Not that good (3.00 / 6) (#20)
by Dacta on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 10:54:20 AM EST

You're missing the point. The poster was saying Galeon is only useful because Mozilla is slow. (You realise Galeon is using the Mozilla rendering engine, don't you? I assume you do, but something about your post made me suspect maybe you didn't?). I think this is a very valid point. Otherwise, why woudl you use it? It might reduce your memory usage somewhat, because it won't have to render the XUL user interface, but this is somewhat ofset by the GTK/GNOME UI memory usage, and the reduced browse functionality it offers. Once Mozilla is as fast and stable (!?) as Galeon, then why would you use Galeon?

The only architecual reason I can see is that it allows you to use your GTK themes, and perhaps allows slightly more GNOME intergration (although I suspect Nautalis with the Mozilla plug-in will reduce the usefulness of that).



[ Parent ]
Re: Oh dear (2.66 / 3) (#28)
by nd on Sat Oct 07, 2000 at 11:32:06 PM EST

Ugh, you are mistaken. First the disclaimer: I am a Galeon developer. Realize I am biased.

<I>Galeon doesn't save cookies. It forgets them on exit. Being less anal than some, I accept and save
all cookies. But Galeon forgetting them is quite irritating. Do the developers even know about this?</I>

Of course we know! I use Galeon on a daily basis, and I'm just as irritated as you are. The cookie policy is outside of Galeon's control. This is a gtkmozembed issue, not Galeon (probably relates to it not initializing profiles -- and don't bug Chris Blizzard about this either, he knows about it).

<I>I'm not sure if this is unique to me (my theme?) or what, but the bookmarks menu is really ugly. It's
spacey. After each bookmarks, there's a new line and it's really enormous because of it. Gross. </I>

It was only this way for 1 or 2 releases, and has since been fixed. If your only issues about Galeon are cosmetic, then I'm happy.

<I>Another I have is that the thing is as stable as a 97 year old lady on one foot (for me). Not only
does it crash on exit (when you close it, it segfaults -- I believe this is unique to me, for the most
part), but it crashes probably twice as much as Mozilla for me (which rarely crashes). It doesn't
take much, and the crashes are mostly random AFAICT. </I>

Galeon is alpha software. We don't claim it's stable. Furthermore, you'll find (with help of a debugger) that 99% of those crashes are gtkmozembed issues. We know this, and they will be resolved. Chris Blizzard is doing an amazing job with gtkmozembed, and understand that it was only recently made usable. The crashes aren't entirely random, but javascript intensive sites do seem to be a culprit.

<I>Finally, I don't really see the advantages of Galeon over Mozilla. I understand them, but I don't see
them happening on my system. Pages render fast in Mozilla nightlies, and the menus are fast
enough for me to tolerate it now. Why would I want this Galeon, Ms. "Mozilla But Uglier"
BitchToCompile, when I can just run Mozilla which is doing me more than fine? </I>

If you are happy with Mozilla, then that's fine. It's true that Galeon's original advantage was that its interface was much cleaner and responsive than Mozilla's. Since then, Mozilla has made improvements in the responsiveness realm and Galeon has gained other advantages. In the future, Galeon will be important to Gnome users who want a <b>web</b> browser that will fit nicely in their desktop. Using gnome libs, session handling, URL/Mime type handlers, will be important to some people. We have other plans as well that will give Galeon advantages over vanilla Mozilla. Stay tuned.


[ Parent ]
Re: Oh dear (4.80 / 5) (#29)
by nd on Sat Oct 07, 2000 at 11:34:03 PM EST

Ugh, you are mistaken. First the disclaimer: I am a Galeon developer. Realize I am biased.

Galeon doesn't save cookies. It forgets them on exit. Being less anal than some, I accept and save all cookies. But Galeon forgetting them is quite irritating. Do the developers even know about this?

Of course we know! I use Galeon on a daily basis, and I'm just as irritated as you are. The cookie policy is outside of Galeon's control. This is a gtkmozembed issue, not Galeon (probably relates to it not initializing profiles -- and don't bug Chris Blizzard about this either, he knows about it). Have you read the FAQ? :)

I'm not sure if this is unique to me (my theme?) or what, but the bookmarks menu is really ugly. It's spacey. After each bookmarks, there's a new line and it's really enormous because of it. Gross.

It was only this way for 1 or 2 releases, and has since been fixed. If your only issues about Galeon are cosmetic, then I'm happy.

Another I have is that the thing is as stable as a 97 year old lady on one foot (for me). Not only does it crash on exit (when you close it, it segfaults -- I believe this is unique to me, for the most part), but it crashes probably twice as much as Mozilla for me (which rarely crashes). It doesn't take much, and the crashes are mostly random AFAICT.

Galeon is alpha software. We don't claim it's stable. Furthermore, you'll find (with help of a debugger) that 99% of those crashes are gtkmozembed issues. We know this, and they will be resolved. Chris Blizzard is doing an amazing job with gtkmozembed, and understand that it was only recently made usable. The crashes aren't entirely random, but javascript intensive sites do seem to be a culprit.

Finally, I don't really see the advantages of Galeon over Mozilla. I understand them, but I don't see them happening on my system. Pages render fast in Mozilla nightlies, and the menus are fast enough for me to tolerate it now. Why would I want this Galeon, Ms. "Mozilla But Uglier" BitchToCompile, when I can just run Mozilla which is doing me more than fine?

If you are happy with Mozilla, then that's fine. It's true that Galeon's original advantage was that its interface was much cleaner and responsive than Mozilla's. Since then, Mozilla has made improvements in the responsiveness realm and Galeon has gained other advantages. In the future, Galeon will be important to Gnome users who want a web browser that will fit nicely in their desktop. Using gnome libs, session handling, URL/Mime type handlers, will be important to some people. We have other plans as well that will give Galeon advantages over vanilla Mozilla. Stay tuned.

[ Parent ]

well (3.25 / 8) (#9)
by tokage on Thu Oct 05, 2000 at 06:45:27 PM EST

I for one think discussing browser technology is important. It's something *nix is really behind in, and something it requires if people want say linux to become mainstream-usable. With the future of the 'internet' being so web dependant(despite my preferences, i dont even like the web much) it's important to have something quick and clean which is integrated with the window manager. Mozilla is a cool project, but it needs -so- much stripping down. The beauty of galeon is it strips down to the form web browsers should be, used for browsing. On *nix platforms, the philosophy is to use many small tools with specific focus to achieve a task, elminating large, hard to maintain bloated programs. What *nix person really wants netscape mail/news, as upposed to mutt or pine? I realize some newer linux people need this, it's just frustrating that products designed for m$ were dumped onto linux/unix, without thinking about the differences in the OS's. Galeon IMO is something that *nix has been wanting for a while, a brower which uses mozilla's cool rendering engine, stripped down to browse while not bothering you with fluff handled by more traditional *nix tools, and staying compliant.

As for people complaining about it being just a person's review of galeon, it's a software testimonial. That's what computer type people do, evaluate programs and decide which ones work where, then implement them(or write their own if none exists). The discussion is inherent in the review, I think, related to browser technologies, which is more usable etc. In case you haven't noticed, the vast majority of new computer users want to get onto "that internet thing" by which they mean the web, which is IE for them, cuz there aint many real contenders for IE in the browser market atm, for various reasons. The browser world is key, as more people are wired everywhere and use the web for everything.

I always play / Russian roulette in my head / It's 17 black, or 29 red

Comparisons to K-meleon (3.62 / 8) (#15)
by Colin Winters on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 01:35:28 AM EST

I don't know if any of you have used K-meleon, but it's basically Galeon for windows-a stripped down mozilla. However, k-meleon is awesome. Loads almost as fast as IE 5, which is impressive if you remember that IE loads when windows does. How did the k-meleon team manage to create such a good product for windows, but the open source alternatives are all slower/more buggy? Heck , the last time I was running galeon, it was using 80 MB of RAM. That's insane. I can only hope that Galeon gets better, but for (in my opinion) the best Gecko-based browser, use K-meleon. Too bad it's only for windows, though.

Colin Winters

Comments on K-meleon (3.83 / 6) (#17)
by AndrewH on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 08:30:57 AM EST

K-meleon has made an impressive start and shows a lot of promise as a browser.

I still have some concerns, that have stopped me from using it more:

  • Some posters to the forums are fretting about the lack of development of what is still alpha software, hopefully a false alarm.
  • No cookies are saved yet, so I have to log in whenever I visit K5.
  • I make extensive use of the option settings in IE. K-meleon comes with a bunch of preference files for Gecko, but I have found no documentation about these on either the K-meleon or Mozilla web sites apart from how to configure a proxy server.
  • I had to post this message from IE after K-meleon crashed on me.

John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr — where are you now that we need you?
[ Parent ]
Correction. (!!) (3.60 / 10) (#19)
by Dacta on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 09:25:01 AM EST

Loads almost as fast as IE 5, which is impressive if you remember that IE loads when windows does

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!
Where do people get this? It is only true in special cases, and for almost every installation of windows it is simply FUD.

Heres what really goes on:
If you have active desktop on, IE will load. This is most likely to be true in some insallations of Windows 98, but can be turned on or off at insallation or by right-clicking on the desktop.

Apart from that, IE does not load at start-up. Some UI Dll's do load (Comctrl.dll, oleauto.dll among others), but most apps use these (including K-Meleon).

Most of IE is implemented in the dlls MSHTML.dll and MSXML.dll (as well as quite a few others - but these are the big ones). They are not loaded until you start IE, or an app that uses the MS HTML control.

Now quite a few apps do use MSHTML.dll (Outlook, MS Money, most HTML editing tools), so this sometimes confuses some people.

Basically though, MS has done an increadibly good job optimising the load time for IE. As a (sometimes) Windows/COM programmer, it is one of the most impressive (and difficult) bits of performace optimisation I've seen.

I've got a DLL load trace somewhere, that proves this, btw. I posted it on Slashdot once, and some idiots tried to claim that MS was somehow hiding that the dll was loaded....... What can you really say to people like that?

Sorry to rant like this.... having said all that, K-Meleon is very impressive, and it's startup time is nearly as good as IE.



[ Parent ]
Re: Comparisons to K-meleon (3.50 / 4) (#26)
by nd on Sat Oct 07, 2000 at 11:19:09 PM EST

On very few accounts is K-meleon superior to Galeon. Your comment has left me very confused.

You call Galeon the "open-source alternative", but understand that Galeon was here FIRST, and K-meleon was a response to Galeon. Furthermore, K-Meleon is open-source.

Also, Galeon is not slower/more buggy. Galeon was _NOT_ using 80MB of RAM. You are lying, or interpreting the top output wrong (don't count each thread, count 1 only).

Galeon has K-Meleon beat bigtime in the feature and usability realm. We provide configuration for basic browser fields, and the important Mozilla fields (K-Meleon does none of these). We have a fairly sophisticated bookmarking system, and we have decent DnD support for the Gnome desktop. We support crash recovery, context menus, middle click to open in new window, history, auto completion, and lots of basic browsing features K-Meleon lacks.

Yes, I'm a little biased considering I'm a Galeon developer. But make no mistake -- Galeon IS superior in most ways to K-Meleon. This is to be expected considering that K-Meleon was a weekend hack, with only one public release (not sure if the second release was made available yet).

I would be very interested in hearing reasons why you consider K-meleon to be better.

[ Parent ]
(3.25 / 8) (#16)
by mikeyo on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 04:52:14 AM EST

One thing I don't like about galeon is that as far as I know, you cannot do anything with the keyboard. It requires using the mouse.

galeon keybindings (4.60 / 5) (#22)
by rob latham on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 12:20:41 PM EST

Hey good news: keyboard bindings work in the new version.

[ Parent ]
Re: galeon keybindings (2.00 / 3) (#24)
by mikeyo on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 10:37:39 PM EST

whats the new version, and how do they work?

[ Parent ]
More cool stuff (2.80 / 5) (#18)
by Dacta on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 08:59:37 AM EST

Galeon is actually even cooler than kmself has pointed out. It's not widely known (and not advertised on the website), but using Galeon lets you also use all the Mozilla XUL stuff. This is very, very cool - even for those of you who think the Mozilla UI is a bloated heap of junk.

For instance, if you hit a "ftp" url in Galeon, it will display the site as using a pretty nice graphical ftp client, in the browser window.

I haven't really tested it too much (the last nightly Mozilla build I downloaded - a few weeks ago - broke), but I suspect it shoudl be able to work with apps like ForumZilla, and probably other things on MozDev



How light is it? (3.00 / 3) (#23)
by cwong on Fri Oct 06, 2000 at 04:55:48 PM EST

How light is it? Would someone care to post their "top" output? I was comparing the new Opera beta with Netscape, so I fired up each of them and browsed into a Slashdot article. This is the sort of output I am hoping to see for Galeon:

 11:32am  up 4 days, 59 min,  4 users,  load average: 0.65, 0.52, 0.33
67 processes: 66 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states:  3.3% user,  1.3% system,  0.0% nice, 95.3% idle
Mem:    63032K av,   60300K used,    2732K free,   29840K shrd,    1308K buff
Swap:   64476K av,   15704K used,   48772K free                   21484K cached

  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT  LIB %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
  731 root      15   0 14392  13M  1044 S       0  0.9 21.8  31:48 X
14806 chris      7   0 13164  12M  8088 S       0  0.0 20.8   0:07 netscape-com
  883 chris      0   0 12172  11M  2232 S       0  0.0 18.0  22:05 xemacs-X11
14785 chris      0   0  7172 7172  4392 S       0  0.0 11.3   0:09 opera
14786 chris      0   0  7172 7172  4392 S       0  0.0 11.3   0:00 opera
14530 chris      0   0  4424 3740  2608 S       0  0.0  5.9   0:05 kfm
14822 chris      0   0  3724 3724  3148 S       0  0.0  5.9   0:00 netscape-com
  654 xfs        0   0  3472 3052   988 S       0  0.0  4.8   1:01 xfs
  735 chris      2   0  3252 2276  1708 S       0  0.0  3.6   0:43 kwm
  771 chris      0   0  2848 1844  1260 S       0  0.0  2.9   0:43 kpanel
14782 chris     17   0   868  868   664 R       0  2.3  1.3   0:05 top

So how about something for Galeon?

Memory usage on my system (4.00 / 5) (#25)
by factotum on Sat Oct 07, 2000 at 01:37:18 PM EST

Somebody asked about memory usage, so here we go.

I fired up Communicator 4.75, a Mozilla that I rolled myself a few days ago and Galeon. Galeon was from the Debian packages that the Galeon team supply, including the Mozilla stuff, though I don't use that build normally (doesn't include MathML, SVG and XSLT). From blank browser windows (freshly started) I went to the K5 main page and from there directly to this article, so they've had pretty much the same lives. What I got from a top, sorted by memory usage, was,


  7:13pm  up  8:47,  4 users,  load average: 2.28, 1.91, 1.06
86 processes: 82 sleeping, 4 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU states:  88.9% user,   9.9% system,   0.0% nice,   1.2% idle
Mem:  128336K av, 121756K used,   6580K free,  72736K shrd,   3404K buff
Swap: 124956K av,  25744K used,  99212K free                 41772K cached

  PID USER     PRI  NI  SIZE  RSS SHARE STAT  LIB %CPU %MEM   TIME COMMAND
10151 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:11 galeon-bin
10182 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:00 galeon-bin
10183 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:00 galeon-bin
10226 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:00 galeon-bin
10231 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:00 galeon-bin
10232 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:00 galeon-bin
10233 martin     0   0 29436  28M 17308 S      32  0.0 22.3   0:00 galeon-bin
  309 root       1   0 39340  24M  1788 S       0  5.6 19.8  15:16 XF86_SVGA
 9038 martin     0   0 15396  14M  8304 S       0  0.1 11.8   0:05 communicator
 8826 martin     0   0 18412 9428  6244 S       4  0.1  7.3   0:19 mozilla-bin
 8857 martin     0   0 18412 9428  6244 S       4  0.0  7.3   0:00 mozilla-bin
 8858 martin     0   0 18412 9428  6244 S       4  0.0  7.3   0:00 mozilla-bin
 9079 martin     0   0 18412 9428  6244 S       4  0.0  7.3   0:00 mozilla-bin
  372 martin     0   0  8936 8784  2464 S       0  0.0  6.8   0:53 emacs
 9148 martin     0   0  3764 3684  3196 S       0  0.0  2.8   0:00 communicator
 2605 news       0   0  2960 2960   616 S       0  0.0  2.3   0:01 leafnode
 1995 martin     0   0  2704 2700  1372 S       0  0.0  2.1   0:03 zsh

Galeon, as can be witnessed, takes up significantly more memory than its brothers. However, I also checked for this a few days ago, where both Mozilla, NN and Galeon had been running a bit longer, and Galeon did not have nearly as high a memory consumption, and Mozilla was ahead of it.

It seems that the greater part of the vast memory usage is a Gecko related issue, it being the common component, which I certainly hope will improve. But since they're planning on using Gecko in embedded environments I suppose that it's not only something that they can do something about, but that they will take care of it. Basic memory consumption in the order of 25 MB just to go on the web seems grotesque. But the guys at mozilla.org aren't stupid, and they certainly don't claim to be finished yet, so I have full confidence in them.

At present I use Mozilla rather than Galeon, because it is a tradeoff between slightly better responsiveness for annoying bugs that I prefer to be without. But I am very optimistic about the project, and wish the developers plenty of wind in their sails.

Martin



Something not quite right here (4.00 / 4) (#27)
by cwong on Sat Oct 07, 2000 at 11:24:56 PM EST

I keep hearing Galeon reviews mentioning that it is "lightweight", but your top output shows that it is anything but. How can a browser that is twice the size of Netscape be "lightweight"? What's going on here?

[ Parent ]
Re: Something not quite right here (4.00 / 1) (#30)
by ramses0 on Mon Oct 09, 2000 at 10:54:30 AM EST

It's lightweight in different areas. Mozilla looks (and feels) like somebody implemented a web-browser in Javascript. All the menus are a little sluggish, they don't match your desktop, and it just feels a little slow.

Galeon has been called lightweight because it implements the user interface with your core GUI widgets (menus and dialog boxes) and ditches the javascript stuff.

I kindof liked galeon a lot when I first saw it, but the newest mozilla builds are just preeeety.

All of this discussion just hinges on the user interface, though. The core rendering engine (ie: the stuff that draws the actual webpage) is exactly the same between the two of them.

--Robert
[ rate all comments , for great justice | sell.com ]
[ Parent ]

Galeon crossing usability threshold | 31 comments (25 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!