Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

A forum for general AmigaOS 4.x support questions that are not platform-specific
User avatar
Raziel
Posts: 997
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 4:00 pm
Location: a dying planet

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by Raziel »

Well, I definitely dont have that kind of money, but using an existing port and building on that sounds far more feasible to me...
People are dying.
Entire ecosystems are collapsing.
We are in the beginning of a mass extinction.
And all you can talk about is money and fairytales of eternal economic growth.
How dare you!
– Greta Thunberg
amifrog
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:12 am

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by amifrog »

A bounty would fail. Nobody is ever gonna pay for a new browser again on Amiga in advance.
As for the port: It seems to be quite hard to do it otherwise it would have been done already. I think the Amiga environment is not porting friendly. Therefore it will require some serious craftsmen to do it and they have better things to do i guess.
Belxjander
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 10:26 pm
Location: 日本千葉県松戸市 / Matsudo City, Chiba, Japan
Contact:

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by Belxjander »

Why target the complete application of a web browser anyway?

AmigaOS DataTypes seem to be a feasible mechanism for detaching the WebKit implimentation from the rest of the Web Browser...

would it be possible to build a WebKit specific DataType with a DataTypes based Browser that explicitly handles JavaScript?

or break it down into further parts? have something similar to the older AWeb design for Network access and UI only,
with WebKit and JavaScript libraries built as a DataType + Library combination?

*THAT* seems to be a strength of AmigaOS in that each "library"/"datatype" or "application" only needs to be written to a specific task
in the traditional "do one thing and do it well" unix style (single tool with a single task) where AmigaOS Applications can then pick up
and use the various libraries to actually perform what is needed to be done.

Would that be possible/practical in breaking up any web browser into something more able to be done and updated without needing a massive port effort repeatedly?

If WebKit is done as a DataType and a JavaScript library can be written/ported to work in concert with it
then the web/datatypes browser on top of that as 3 separate items. (each being an own binary object and build)

Would that not make things easier?
NinjaCyborg
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:28 pm

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by NinjaCyborg »

Whilst theoretically it's a good idea to 'engine-ize' the webview, the DataTypes system is not really sophisticated enough. There is already a proof of concept html datatype which can render them as rich text, but of course it dates from before CSS, HTML5 etc. The datatypes system itself would need to be overhauled and 'finished' so it could support for example stream IO, proper nested documents, progressively loaded bitmap rendering.

I do agree that ideally the OS should have a web engine component separate from the browser app 'chrome' (small c) as this is how all modern browsers are architected. And, if Amiga OS (4 at least, it's probably a stretch for 3 due to RAM requirements of modern browser engines) had a well maintained modern browser, no need complain about lack of apps since Office, Photoshop and pretty much anything can run in a browser these days.
Belxjander
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 10:26 pm
Location: 日本千葉県松戸市 / Matsudo City, Chiba, Japan
Contact:

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by Belxjander »

I was more thinking of getting a start with the existing DataTypes... have an updated HTML DataType which can render pages and provide methods for a JavaScript library to modify post-load (something akin to using the DataType Class to work with two instances and integrate the results?)

Then we can deal with anything that is streamed/progressive using a separate library (DataTypes does allow for "pseudo filehandle" style access which might be a plausible mechanism for the partial loading mechanism... but would require a separate task/process per instance of a given class)

That is why I referenced Aweb ( I used to use this specifically with DataTypes for everything not the HTML...)

What about just getting "a foot in the door" so to speak as we already have a number of Image DataTypes and most?/all? Amiga Web Browsers appear to use DataTypes for Image Loading...

can we not start with a WebBrowser styled DataTypes browser... and then expand DataTypes towards a more "Everything is a DataType" Browser experience?
and would separation of Javascript and HTML/CSS not lower the bar to entry for making a more unified browser experience on AmigaOS generally?

as for the "Application in Browser" experiences...

I've watched my wife get completely pissed off to the point of never touching Adobe Photoshop newer than CS2 locally installed due to the "network required features". and the same goes for the MS Office suite.

actually every Japanese person I've met has preferred the local install of Office and not the networked edition despite that the local installs are no longer actually able to be purchased anymore... its all the Office365 thing...
NinjaCyborg
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:28 pm

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by NinjaCyborg »

My point regarding the online versions of applications is that, you're never ever going to get native Amiga ports of those. AmiCygnix and ports of Linux equivalents is one option. But the other option - and the one that would mean Amiga remains viable as a hobby platform for years to come - would be a modern browser. Besides, everyone I know uses google docs these days and not office, so, your mileage may vary.

Back to the question of using datatypes - yes you could build a simple browser engine using them but like i said, datatypes as it stands now is unfinished, commodore never did half of what they envisioned it to do and no one since has finished it either. More importantly, it wouldn't be webkit or blink or firefox and it wouldn't do all the things those do, from webrtc to webgl to html5 to webassembly so porting is the only option. Fortunately OS4 DOES have most of the dependencies needed for webkit, most notably Cairo, so it's not outside the realm of possibility technically.
corto
AmigaOS Core Developer
AmigaOS Core Developer
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:53 am

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by corto »

amifrog wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:17 pm As the Wayfarer code is in ObjectiveC, wouldn't this be a big show stopper for a port?
You're right. It is a show stopper. If we had resources, they would be better used working something else than the support of ObjectiveC. By the way, I don't understand this choice for some MorphOS developments (I suspect it is just a personal choice by a developer who likes it).
User avatar
polluks
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 6:30 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by polluks »

Belxjander wrote: Wed Nov 11, 2020 1:16 am AmigaOS DataTypes seem to be a feasible mechanism for detaching the WebKit implimentation from the rest of the Web Browser...
Well, if you try Facebook or GitHub the JavaScript engine is the trouble maker.
How could the concept of DataTypes help you?
corto wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2020 9:27 am By the way, I don't understand this choice for some MorphOS developments (I suspect it is just a personal choice by a developer who likes it).
"The main difference comes from the fact that BOOPSI classes need to be manually created with functions being manually assigned their IDs and let's not even start on the extra hassle of having to write the code for the dispatchers. This made programmers reluctant to add new classes in their applications, in turn making the overall code less object oriented. Here's where Objective-C fills in." https://morphos-team.net/guide/objective-c
Belxjander
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 10:26 pm
Location: 日本千葉県松戸市 / Matsudo City, Chiba, Japan
Contact:

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by Belxjander »

@polluks
Well, if you try Facebook or GitHub the JavaScript engine is the trouble maker.
How could the concept of DataTypes help you?
Detachment of the Web Rendering from the JavaScript using a native mechanism...
meaning the whole DOM and HTML/CSS rendering being in the DataType makes the "Browser" more of a Script Engine Application applying changes to a DOM{HTML/CSS} DataTypeClass Instance, with one or more instances being usable at runtime.

use of the DataTypes system for *renderable* Class Objects and then updating those objects at runtime using Methods (scripting or Application usage of the DataType for changing render details.

This is how the DataTypes would help (also that separation means the JavaScript engine being updated of the Rendering Engine being updated is then able to be done as separate updates without rebuilding both into a monolithic browser ( Embedded Web Support in other applications also comes to mind...)

Documents had the initial background for a DOM but didn't actually have an implimentation... also starting(modifying an existing?) DataTypes Class for such a thing would at least get a beginning happening... can an existing Web Browser be broken into a DOM Class that is then accessible or modify-capable for a JavaScript "Application"/"Tool" to then be used with it?

do we need to have the *whole*browser* as a single Application or can that be split up to be easier to develop?

We have sparse developer resources to begin with... small steps is better and easier than large projects from what I can tell.

am I wrong?
User avatar
polluks
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 6:30 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Any hope for a Wayfarer browser port for OS 4?

Post by polluks »

Belxjander wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:32 am am I wrong?
Not wrong but you don't get the point. Are you sure browsers are still monolithic?
You can already replace some parts e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/a/52383997/1430535

As NinjaCyborg stated Cairo does the rendering, we are not talking about AWeb,
WebKit is more or less a black box in OS4.
You want to rewrite the engine, but we are still unable to fix OWB :cry:
Some code is little endian (no-one cares), there are memory leaks
(doesn´t matter if you are 64 bit).

Back to topic Wayfarer is a front end for the current WebKit,
no development team, just a one man show.
Maybe your modular approach is a nice idea but not the point.
Post Reply