please explain Dillo to me

Forum: DSL Ideas and Suggestions
Topic: please explain Dillo to me
started by: vees

Posted by vees on June 08 2006,21:55

Hi,

Why does DSL have both Firefox AND Dillo?! What does Dillo add?

I am not against Dillo, but would adding the very different Lynx which is only available as a myDSL extension.

Firefox+Dillo or Firefox+Lynx - which makes more sense?

Thanks for any explanation,

VS

Posted by kerry on June 08 2006,22:05

lynx is a text browser. Why would you want to be stuck with only text? I like dillo, i'm using it now, it very fast for the stage it's at now and can only get better with time. If you want lynx add lynx. I find lynx is also not very new user friendly. Dillo works very well in cases were there's not enough ram to run FF.

Posted by vees on June 09 2006,00:56

agreed. but what does Dillo do which FF does not?

Posted by mikshaw on June 09 2006,01:04

It survives in low-ram situations where firefox would choke and die.
And it's much faster.

Posted by kerry on June 09 2006,01:07

Dillo, does not suck up all the resources. You can see it for yourself, just open FF and look how much your ram goes up and look at your cpu hit 100% when starting, then do the same with dillo.

Posted by roberts on June 09 2006,06:37

On my 200Mhz 64MB machine, it is Dillo that I must use.
Even Opera seems slow on this machine.
I imagine that there are many other like me and use Dillo.

Posted by flatcat on June 09 2006,11:14

Agreed, I have a fairly ancient system and firefox is slow where dillo is v. fast but I think you need to keep firefox in reserve for the odd site that dillo can't cope with.

Posted by vees on June 09 2006,13:45

ok. thanks for the explanations and LONG LIVE DILLO! It should definitely stay

Cheers,

VS

Posted by humpty on June 09 2006,14:42

i think firefox should be taken out. it's 18mb !!

Posted by vees on June 09 2006,15:39

no - not a good idea. firefox is the only browser out there which has this truly amazing selection of extensions. I personally use at least 4 all the time. No, firefox must absolutely stay. taking it away will really lessen the value of DSL.

Posted by mikshaw on June 09 2006,22:18

Even without Firefox extensions, Firefox is the smallest browser available that accurately supports CSS, javascript, and media plugins. Dillo is the equivalent of a text browser with buttons, in comparison.
I definitely don't mean that to say Dillo is bad...i use it daily for viewing "plain" html. But it is extremely limited on today's web, as was mentioned in the other firefox-vs-dillo threads.

I have been keeping my eyes open for a good compromise between firefox and dillo, but so far it doesn't exist....you either have limited support of certain html features or you have a fatass resource hog (opera fits into that category as well).

Posted by Thulemanden on June 10 2006,00:02

Quote (kerry @ June 08 2006,21:07)

Dillo, does not suck up all the resources. You can see it for yourself, just open FF and look how much your ram goes up and look at your cpu hit 100% when starting, then do the same with dillo.

Maybe, but it seems only to render simple html pages correctly.

What's the use of a mean and lean browser id the page it shows is imperfect and missing information?

I agree, save spae and dump lynx and dillo.

FireFox loathers can replace it with Opera which seems to be slick and fast. It also holds an email client so you can delete sylpheed too.

Posted by kerry on June 10 2006,00:06

I'd give up the distro before i gave up firefox and i use dillo when i don't want distractions and just want some fast surfing.
Opera still takes up more resources than dillo to run.

Posted by vees on June 10 2006,00:38

Quote (Thulemanden @ June 09 2006,20:02)

]FireFox loathers can replace it with Opera which seems to be slick and fast. It also holds an email client so you can delete sylpheed too.

Opera?!

No way - anything but that. No, the currecnt FF+dillo combination is great :cool:

Posted by vees on June 10 2006,04:15

BTW - I just noticed that Dillo cannot render some - but not all, cyrillic pages so FF remains a must (at least for me)

But I have to admit that dillo is hyper-fast (faster than lynx I think) and its 'inability' to show flash advertisement is a great plus for sure :;):

What a great little browser. I just wish there was a way of blocking all images and I would be in heaven!

Posted by humpty on June 10 2006,19:51

firefox isn't so great, it fails on some websites when doing money transactions, especially with java. I have to revert to opera when doing those. but I still prefer FF because the opera interface sucks.

don't get me wrong, dillo cannot be compared to firefox. i just think firefox is too big for the distro. i would rather use it as a .uci and free up ram.

Posted by mikshaw on June 10 2006,22:07

To be honest, you're not really using any more ram simply by having firefox as part of the base system. The only time it would is if you run toram, which with DSL would aways equal 50mb anyway...if firefox wasn't there something else would be there to make up the difference. Even after running mkwriteable, the only additions to ramdisk are symlinks.