Why Camino

Talk about the native Mac OS X browser.

Moderator: Camino Developers

User avatar
alzubra
Posts: 9
Joined: March 12th, 2004, 1:39 am
Contact:

Post by alzubra »

I prefer the Mozilla browsers to Safari because I think more pages (at least the ones I visit) look right with Gecko. Safari supports a few advanced CSS features, but it's not enough to make up for the many other pages that look odd.

As for why Camino and not Firefox, for me, it's one small issue and one big issue. The small one is that Camino has close buttons on the tabs. That's VERY much a personal preference issue, as other threads have attested, but it's just how I like to work. I can't say this is a be all end all, though, since Camino has its own quirks that Firefox doesn't share -- I also miss form memory and look forward to auto-fill. But I know it's coming. :-)

The chief issue I have with Firefox is that it doesn't support the Services menu. I use it a lot in my browsing, so unless Bug 135268 is ever fixed, using Firefox full time isn't an option for me. Of course, Safari and OmniWeb support services, too, if the page rendering isn't a big deal for you.

I'm not bothered so much by the interface on Firefox. It's not so great out of the box, but there's some nice CSS for changing the look of form widgets.
Old davedit
Posts: 0
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 5:00 pm

Post by Old davedit »

alzubra wrote:As for why Camino and not Firefox, for me, it's one small issue and one big issue. The small one is that Camino has close buttons on the tabs. That's VERY much a personal preference issue, as other threads have attested, but it's just how I like to work.


Just in case you're interested, Tab Browser Extension for Firefox can do this for you (along with quite a few other features)
User avatar
alzubra
Posts: 9
Joined: March 12th, 2004, 1:39 am
Contact:

Post by alzubra »

Yeah, I've tried it in the past, but it's a bit complex for just implementing this one feature. That's a problem that I seemed to find with a lot of Firefox extensions in the past - that they offer a dizzying array of options. But that's the nature of this sort of thing. Yet it's true, if the close buttons are your big issue with Firefox, that extension is the solution. But I still like Camino best. :-)
Old davedit
Posts: 0
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 5:00 pm

Post by Old davedit »

Hehe ya. Well actually, when I first used it, it was a bit intimidating, but if you go slowly through the options, it's not too complex really. I think one of the complaints some people have about close buttons on every tab is that they like to have many many tabs open at a time, and when they switch between tabs, they accidentally click the close button instead of the tab itself. That's not really a problem for me though, as I usually only have 1-3 tabs open at a time, and close my window after I'm done surfing.
User avatar
rizkahz
Posts: 190
Joined: May 3rd, 2004, 4:22 am

Post by rizkahz »

Actually, there's an extension called Tab-X that *only* adds the close box to the tabs...
Old davedit
Posts: 0
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 5:00 pm

Post by Old davedit »

True, but there's a difference: Tab-X literally only adds an X as the close button, while TBE puts the actual close button from the right side of the tab bar onto every tab, which quite simply looks better. That and Tab-X is not compatible with all themes, and ends up screwing up the tabs in some of them, though this is only with OSX if I'm not mistaken.

EDIT: woops, I just realized what the title of this thread was... Sorry for straying off topic
poorsinfa
Posts: 55
Joined: October 4th, 2004, 6:10 am

Camino OS X "look" in Firefox pages

Post by poorsinfa »

love
Last edited by poorsinfa on August 18th, 2006, 7:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rizkahz
Posts: 190
Joined: May 3rd, 2004, 4:22 am

Post by rizkahz »

Jon got these out, too; not sure who was first though....

http://www.hicksdesign.co.uk/journal/55 ... -x-widgets
User avatar
mackinaw
Posts: 14
Joined: November 13th, 2004, 3:21 pm

camino v firefox

Post by mackinaw »

recently seduced by the free software movement, and switched from safari to camino - but camino was unstable and seemed slow. tried firefox, converted. seems a bit slicker, a bit faster, definitely more stable, and I find it easier. On a mac osx g3 ibook.
ronin65
Posts: 573
Joined: March 25th, 2003, 10:44 pm

Re: camino v firefox

Post by ronin65 »

mackinaw wrote:recently seduced by the free software movement, and switched from safari to camino - but camino was unstable and seemed slow. tried firefox, converted. seems a bit slicker, a bit faster, definitely more stable, and I find it easier. On a mac osx g3 ibook.


Give Mozilla a try. It will show you some of the features that you will need to add to FF by way of extensions or user.js file additions. There are a number of extensions which have only become functional again (after a very long time) with the release of FF 1.0.
Snow7
Posts: 752
Joined: November 6th, 2004, 7:09 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Post by Snow7 »

Everyone says Camino and Firefox are small and compact but when I look at their file sizes, they're the heaviest of the four browsers I have. Safari weighs in at 9,886K, IE is 14,387K, Camino at 24, 327K, and Firefox 25,631K.
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en; rv:1.9pre) Gecko/2008061622 Camino/2.0a1pre (like Firefox/3.0pre)
User avatar
Uncle Asad
Camino Developer
Posts: 3957
Joined: July 24th, 2004, 1:38 pm
Location: بين العالمين
Contact:

Post by Uncle Asad »

Keep in mind that the size for Safari is just for the interface and whatnot; the rendering engine (WebKit/WebCore and JavaScriptCpre) is elsewhere on the disk and is another 9 MB or so. And IE is a four-year old app/rendering engine, so apples to apples the modern browsers are roughly the same size. And of course compared to Mozilla, they're all "small and compact"! :)
smorgan
Camino Developer
Posts: 2430
Joined: March 16th, 2004, 1:50 pm

Post by smorgan »

Plus, a lot of times people are talking about the interface being slim, not the application itself. Once it's downloaded, a few extra MB on disk isn't that big a deal to most people.
Snow7
Posts: 752
Joined: November 6th, 2004, 7:09 am
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia

Post by Snow7 »

Uncle Asad wrote:And of course compared to Mozilla, they're all "small and compact"! :)


:lol:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en; rv:1.9pre) Gecko/2008061622 Camino/2.0a1pre (like Firefox/3.0pre)
ronin65
Posts: 573
Joined: March 25th, 2003, 10:44 pm

Post by ronin65 »

smorgan wrote:Plus, a lot of times people are talking about the interface being slim, not the application itself. Once it's downloaded, a few extra MB on disk isn't that big a deal to most people.


I suppose that makes a command line browser (no UI at all) preferable...(not).
Post Reply