Browser for Handheld PC.....

I've got another more sensible bid of $500.

Eight months is even pushing it to get functionality akin to desktop IE6/FireFox/Opera. It's one thing to make some kind of web browser that doesn't render even as well as IE4, but consider how many hours have been invested into those three browsers that do the full HTML/CSS/JavaScript and handle newer AJAX pages.

Economically, it makes much more sense to get newer programs working on a dead platform (a la RedGear) or put a living platform on (a la Linux). And cmonex is right - RedGear is not defunct; I just had to disappear for awhile. There will be an update soon on my forums. Options are always good, so maybe you don't want to fully rely on that, but it's important to understand that a brand new fully functional web browser for any platform doesn't come without great time and cost.

welcome back

But Redgear doesn't work on Handheld PC Pro does it?

stingraze, what an excellent idea! I can't believe I've never though to fit myself (having used them before)

Personally, I would like to see more browser developments in addition to Redgear.

The Redgear project has been delayed forever, and judging from the programmer's

priority between his life and Redgear, I doubt that the resulting browser will be

very perfect. So, I definitely what to see more competing browser projects and

nobody should discourage new browser projects in favor of one that fails to

deliver repeatedly!


Just my 2 cents !

The only thing I'm worried about is that if Win CE 2.11 has the capability to process a browser application. The thing about the rendering speed. But I think 133Mhz + is pretty good.... I wonder what regular cellphones' CPU clock speed is, cause my cellphone's much better than my MC-R520

Edited by stingraze 2007-09-03 6:05 PM

Yeah, take that, isotherm! Redgear should be far more important than your life.

well, i had the chance once to try opera on isotherm's jornada 720 remotely and it seemed quite good.

>Yeah, take that, isotherm! Redgear should be far more important than your life.

Please do not take my words out of the context. There are better place to insult other if you want to.

That's what I read from the post here that isotherm! decided to put his life (daily life, gf/spouse/baby......etc, we don't know !)
ahead of redgear project. So, Readgear is still a vaporware !

Are you telling us that "vaporwares" and "false hopes" are far more important than "promise" and "actual release" ?


My point is still that: as a HPC user (J720/J728/Sig3/NEC MP 900C), I like to see and will encourage more browser
developments. Just because somebody said that his project is in development does NOT exclude others from developing
similar applications.

Favoritism will hurt world progress !

fy78901: isotherm does say it is OK to have more options.

as i see it (after having had a chance to talk to him) : redgear is much more closer to release than this browser no one has started developing at all yet. afaik he just has to polish up some things to make the user experience nicer.

of course, if someone starts making it that'll be great, just it'll take a very long time and lots of money.

I'm not discouraging that either. I just have a problem with us expecting these folks to put our needs before theirs (and their families' ). The only thing I'd expect from software developers who charge for their products is that they make every effort to make it the best product they can (taking whatever time is necessary to make it so), and once it is released, that they continue to do so (acknowledging and addressing bug reports, etc) to ensure that buyers are getting their money's worth. I don't expect a developer to be pinned down to a date to release - and that's where I have an issue with isotherm as well. Since he announced here that it would be released in late May or early June (which he was not obligated to do), it would have been reasonable to make an occasional post advising us that it's being postponed.

Nonetheless, it's one thing to say that one does not wish to wait for a product to come out; it's quite another to directly criticize its developer's personal priorities.

Edited by CE Geek 2007-09-03 9:58 PM

>Nonetheless, it's one thing to say that one does not wish to wait for a product to come out; it's quite another to directly criticize its >developer's personal priorities.

Paraphrasing some post I saw here about the reasons the developer delaying the software release does not
automatically translate to "criticize" him/her.

Of course, it may feel so in the special eyes of their protective friends.

I understand that we cannot ask developers putting us ahead of their family; but again I saw posts that
repeatedly say that it's ready, but never release. How about a beta release to let us get a glimpse?
While there are others who still believes that other potential developers' work might be futile as this
redgear is very close to being released.

Again, we should encourage more developers to enhance competition.

If you read my previous post again, you'll see that I said exactly the same thing.

With all due respect, it's rather presumptuous to conclude that I'm a "protective friend" of isotherm on the basis of what I said in that post. Let's see - I've never met isotherm; I've never communicated with him outside these forums except to purchase the 3Com WiFi card he was selling; and I have no particular interest in Redgear . . . well, that certainly qualifies me as a "protective friend."

Could we please focus our discussion on the product and not the person?

Well, there was really no need to discuss this here. In short, these things are my hobbies, and although many people may have been anxiously anticipating, the project or even its existence hardly crossed my mind for months. Also, to try to clear it up once and for all, RedGear is not a browser. It is somewhat like an OS upgrade that lets you run Opera (web browser) and other programs. Therefore the quality of the browser is not really in question.

This brings up the point I mentioned earlier. If I (an experienced programmer) thought it was easier to write a brand new web browser than to try to make Opera work, then I would've done that. But I didn't, because I realize how much work it is. It's very easy to underestimate how much effort goes into something you use every day, such as a web browser. Basically, if it costs less than the $20,000, it will end up being worse than the existing IE3 or WorldTalk. For $100 or $500, they may be thinking they will take something like wxHTML (cross platform) and make a web browser of it. Sure, it would display HTML, but not any better than before. It's designed for simple rich text, not web browsing.

For an appropriate amount of money, you would probably be paying for them to port Gecko to HPC, which is all well and good, except it probably wouldn't be that fast (Minimo certainly isn't on newer platforms, although that may not be due to Gecko). To see for yourself, try loading Linux on a Jornada 690 or similar. I tried Konqueror Embedded on one of those and can't say I was particularly impressed (and it's supposed to be faster than Gecko). However, for these devices, I would say that Linux remains the best option, unless you're really going to find enough money to fund the project.

Basically, all HPC devices are relatively slow to do modern web browsing (it's designed for desktop computers, which can even have trouble with it sometimes). Also, CE 2.11 devices not only have slower processors and limited RAM (an especial downer for web browsing), but the OS itself seems to be sluggish. I would say that Linux with Konqueror Embedded is the best option for these devices.

If it only costs $500 to write a good web browser from scratch, then there would be hundreds of browsers with distinct rendering engines. But it's a very time-consuming proposition. If you're able to communicate with bidders you might want to ask them exactly what they intend to implement and how, why they've bid so low, if they're familiar with the limitations of the HPC platform, and if they're aware that there is not MSHTML support (many may be thinking they just need to make a front-end to Internet Explorer components - but they aren't there).

I don't mind options, but I don't want you to throw your money away either. You need much more strict specifications than you presently have (IE 5 compatible is vague, and making JavaScript optional means that it won't be included) so that the successful bidder can't weasel around them.

So the summary of this post is: Writing a browser is a lot of work. I don't want to discourage it, but if you're going to pay for it, get it done right and raise the $20,000 needed. If you accept one of the ridiculously low bids, I think you'll be sorely disappointed at some wasted money. For the sake of the users I hope I'm wrong of course, but that's my fair warning.

Edited by isotherm 2007-09-04 2:00 AM