(another) WebKit port of Browse

C. Scott Ananian cscott at laptop.org
Tue Jul 8 04:37:52 EDT 2008

A couple points:

a) SSL overhead being "impractical"?  Come on.  You can use SSL on the
browser today; there is no perceptible speed difference.  I agree that
client certs may be impractical, but it won't be because the XO can't
handle the computation.

b) Many of the customization issues mooted are just as possible to
implement using firefox extensions as they are using the current
Browse strategy.  Even simplified UI is pretty trivial to implement;
see http://lifehacker.com/software/firefox/geek-to-live--consolidate-firefoxs-chrome-210542.php
for example.

The real question to me is whether there are size (memory & nand)
disadvantages to Firefox.  Othewise it's just a practical problem of
finding enough resources to implement a Firefox extension to match the
current Browse functionality.

 ( http://cscott.net/ )

More information about the Devel mailing list