Re: Browser Use

--===============1687610108==
Content-type: multipart/signed; boundary=Apple-Mail-2--768057640; micalg=sha1; 
	protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"


--Apple-Mail-2--768057640
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=WINDOWS-1252;
	format=flowed;
	delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

To get OmniWeb working with MobileMe you need to mess with the site =20
specific preferences. See this thread for more:

http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=3D9751

Cheers,

Jonathan

On 21 Feb 2009, at 10:15, John Stalberg wrote:

>
> On 11 feb 2009, at 10.30, Andrew Zima wrote:
>>
>> Would the last person mind sharing an example of Firefox's lack of =20=

>> Contextual menu support? YMMV but I've never had a problem with =20
>> contextual menus [finding them or using them on G4/G5/intel].
>>
>> In the future, could the person having problems atleast mention =20
>> what OS [ 10.3, 10.4, 10.5] and what platform [PPC vs intel] ?
>>
> I=92m not the person you are referring to but I have a Cocoa favourite =
=20
> I use a lot. The mini Dictionary view you can access by hovering =20
> over a word and hit a key combination. The correct keys is located =20
> in System Preferences/Keyboard and Mouse/Keyboard shortcuts. I have =20=

> changed my settings and cant remember the original. It might have =20
> been ctrl + d?
>
> There are probably a plug-in for FF that will do this and this =20
> illustrates a bit the different approach between OW and FF. OW comes =20=

> jammed with integrated features and FF needs to be taken care of by =20=

> the user until it shines.
>
> I don't know when the Dictionary feature were introduced but it has =20=

> been there for Cocoa apps for at least a couple of OS X versions and =20=

> it is CPU agnostic.
>
> My biggest issue with FF is it=92s inability to scale performance =20
> wise. With some (large) amount of heavily tabbed windows, perhaps =20
> with lots of scripts and/or flash, it stalls on me. I find OW =20
> reaches crawling speeds in a more direct proportion to the load as =20
> does Safari. FF however suddenly hits the limit and if I'm less than =20=

> very patient I have to force quit it. This is with latest FF 3.0.6 =20
> on latest OS X 10.5.6 on both Intel and PPC. With faster hardware =20
> the problem gets easier to get out of since it all depends on =20
> waiting for the browser underpinnings to finnish whatever it is =20
> doing. The whole OS wide user interface often gets stalled when this =20=

> is happening to me and sometimes I find it easier to remotely login =20=

> (I have a couple of Macs sitting on my desktop connected with Gbit) =20=

> and kill FF from a command line.
>
> OW might not be perfect (yet) but all in all it is one of the things =20=

> that really makes my choice of OS platform extra worthwhile. When I =20=

> think about it OS X would be significantly less attractive if OW =20
> disappeared! And yet it would be pretty nice anyway in such a case.
>
> I think Apple should make their http://www.me.com/ page to recognise =20=

> OW as a capable browser with the default browser settings. Or is it =20=

> perhaps OmniGroup that should think twice about it and come up with =20=

> a solution? In any case there should be an non issue to surf right =20
> in on http://www.me.com/ with a WebKit based browser such as OW.
>
> John Stalberg
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OmniWeb-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/omniweb-l


--Apple-Mail-2--768057640--

--===============1687610108==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
OmniWeb-l mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/omniweb-l

--===============1687610108==--