19-Apr-2024 18:39 GMT.
[News] New web browser for Amiga-like systems in developmentANN.lu
Posted on 10-Jun-2004 18:15 GMT by The Paihia Team63 comments
View flat
View list
The Paihia Team would like to announce the development of their new web browser, named Paihia. We hope to have an initial release by the end of 2004. Amiga-like systems and their users are crying out for a standards compliant browser. Despite all the modern web standards being very old (CSS2 is 7 years old, HTML4 is 5 years old) Amiga-like systems still lack in this area.

The leading objective of the Paihia authors (there are now 3 of us) are the implementation of real web standards - we aren't interestd in partial implementations, or bits here, and bits there. All 3 of us have extensive experience with modern web standards and we are particularly keen on being able to use our Amiga-like systems with the web, both to their full potential. HTML 4, Java/ECMAScript 1.5, CSS2.1, and DOM level 3 will feature in our initial release, with us then looking at more recent XML-based web standards which are still not widely used on the web for subsequent development.

Although work has been ongoing for 5 months now (and only recently with 3 developers), we still have a significant amount to complete. Having said that, we've been monitoring the progress of AmiZilla, and looking at their recent progress update on ANN, we are satisfied that Paihia is at a somewhat more advanced stage.

Paihia will be shareware. The application has been written from scratch and does not utilise any existing web content engines. Although this seems duplication of work, our progress tells us it isn't.

We should mention that we all lean slightly towards MorphOS and AROS, however, economics tell us there will more than likely be a version for AmigaOS3, and OS4.

In the next few months we'll be making public a website, with screenshots, of the new browser.

Keep watching!

The Paihia Team

List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Anonymous10-Jun-2004 16:53 GMT
Comment 2Kjetil10-Jun-2004 16:58 GMT
Comment 3itix10-Jun-2004 17:02 GMT
Comment 4Anonymous10-Jun-2004 17:28 GMT
Comment 5Anonymous10-Jun-2004 17:34 GMT
Comment 6damn10-Jun-2004 17:42 GMT
Comment 7tokaiRegistered user10-Jun-2004 17:57 GMT
Comment 8Anonymous10-Jun-2004 18:14 GMT
Comment 9Anonymous10-Jun-2004 18:19 GMT
Comment 10Fabio AlemagnaRegistered user10-Jun-2004 19:21 GMT
Comment 11ANR RULEZ10-Jun-2004 19:29 GMT
Comment 12Jope10-Jun-2004 19:29 GMT
Comment 13Anonymous10-Jun-2004 19:39 GMT
Comment 14Bobson10-Jun-2004 19:41 GMT
Comment 15Anonymous10-Jun-2004 19:44 GMT
Comment 16Emeric SH10-Jun-2004 19:55 GMT
Comment 17tokaiRegistered user10-Jun-2004 19:56 GMT
Comment 18Alkis TsapanidisRegistered user10-Jun-2004 19:59 GMT
Comment 19anonymous10-Jun-2004 21:44 GMT
Comment 20cheesegrate10-Jun-2004 22:34 GMT
Comment 21SenexRegistered user11-Jun-2004 02:20 GMT
Comment 22The_Editor11-Jun-2004 03:09 GMT
Comment 23gary_c11-Jun-2004 03:15 GMT
Comment 24Sammy Nordström11-Jun-2004 04:39 GMT
Comment 25itix11-Jun-2004 04:51 GMT
Comment 26gary_c11-Jun-2004 05:03 GMT
Comment 27Sammy Nordström11-Jun-2004 05:19 GMT
Comment 28Don CoxRegistered user11-Jun-2004 05:24 GMT
Comment 29Emeric SH11-Jun-2004 05:44 GMT
New web browser for Amiga-like systems in development : Comment 30 of 63ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 11-Jun-2004 06:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Don Cox):
>"a) You will not be able to run them on the same hardware."
>You may be able to in the future. Who can tell?

We know enough to not make any hardware purchase and expect support for both operating systems. At this point, we simply *have to* assume that we will never be able to dual boot these two operating systems and choose hardware based on which OS we prefer and which OS we can be without.

>"b) The development, marketing and forensic efforts behind these operating
>systems are in direct opposition to each other which is rather counter
>productive for the small and far from profitable Amiga market."
>I doubt if "forensic" was the word you wanted.

Maybe "legal actions" is a better term, please excuse my english. However, I doubt our different views on things would be due to the language barrier.

>Both teams are about the same size, several people are working on parts for
>both OSes, both companies are small, all the people involved are Amiga
>enthusiasts. Both teams hope to sell to far more than the current Amiga

So, beeing equal makes them less of competitors and more like partners working alongside with each other? I'm sorry but all of the above is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand, the fact that they are opposing each others efforts with basicly every means available remains. They are opposing each others development efforts by making exclusive deals with third parties and by inventing their own software and hardware standards. They are opposing each others marketing efforts with public mud slinging and "parasitic marketing". Most devastating for all, they are even opposing each others existence with legal means. Tell me, how could any of this possibly look like they are working "alongside" each other? I mean, working "alongside" someone means to me that they are either cooperating or atleast staying out of each others way.

>"Whichever of these operating systems that you may prefer, none of them are
>running "alongside" of the other, IMO."
>They look pretty well neck-and-neck to me.

It seems more like they are going head-to-head to me.
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 31Anonymous11-Jun-2004 06:29 GMT
Comment 32Atheist211-Jun-2004 06:32 GMT
Comment 33itix11-Jun-2004 08:02 GMT
Comment 34Alkis TsapanidisRegistered user11-Jun-2004 09:03 GMT
Comment 35cheesegrate11-Jun-2004 09:46 GMT
Comment 36hnl_dkRegistered user11-Jun-2004 11:19 GMT
Comment 37James Carroll11-Jun-2004 11:26 GMT
Comment 38James Carroll11-Jun-2004 11:34 GMT
Comment 39hnl_dkRegistered user11-Jun-2004 11:59 GMT
Comment 40Eva11-Jun-2004 12:53 GMT
Comment 41Kjetil11-Jun-2004 13:04 GMT
Comment 42cheesegrate11-Jun-2004 13:52 GMT
Comment 43cheesegrate11-Jun-2004 13:52 GMT
Comment 44Anonymous11-Jun-2004 14:18 GMT
Comment 45Sammy Nordström11-Jun-2004 16:14 GMT
Comment 46Sammy Nordström11-Jun-2004 16:17 GMT
Comment 47Crumb // AATRegistered user11-Jun-2004 21:49 GMT
Comment 48Alkis TsapanidisRegistered user11-Jun-2004 22:38 GMT
Comment 49Anonymous12-Jun-2004 03:05 GMT
Comment 50smithy12-Jun-2004 07:09 GMT
Comment 51smithy12-Jun-2004 07:10 GMT
Comment 52Felix12-Jun-2004 11:32 GMT
Comment 53Anonymous12-Jun-2004 12:40 GMT
Comment 54Henrik Mikael Kristensen13-Jun-2004 07:46 GMT
Comment 55pixie14-Jun-2004 09:58 GMT
Comment 56vortexau14-Jun-2004 11:27 GMT
Comment 57brotheris14-Jun-2004 11:37 GMT
Comment 58Sammy Nordström14-Jun-2004 12:15 GMT
Comment 59Henrik Mikael Kristensen14-Jun-2004 20:16 GMT
Comment 60ikirRegistered user15-Jun-2004 11:59 GMT
Comment 61samo7915-Jun-2004 22:02 GMT
Comment 62samo7915-Jun-2004 22:09 GMT
Comment 63samo7927-Jul-2004 21:59 GMT
Back to Top