It seems everybody is displeased with the major borwsers: Firefox, Chrome, and Internet Explorer/Edge. Some have turned to forks of these projects, but there are often only marginally better in a few areas and much worse in others. They all suffer from terrible memory leaks and ridiculous bloat, 200MB for a firefox browser install. Optimization is dead. That art and once (and in my opinion always needed, why not have things run better?) We have all these abundance of resources, fast CPU, GPU, RAM, storage, etcetera. What is done with these? Write the worst, bloated code possible and put the burden on the end user to need a GB to run 5MB JS/other nightmares web pages. Are the standards so fucked no one can write a functional modern browser?
This applies across the board with all applications (good God the 100+GB games, what if I was in a bandwidth restricted area, not much space, or wanted to play offline? I would have to pirate a repack, great business model locking your customers out of their own shit, it works apparenlty fuck people and thier scraps) . Can those niggers do me the courtesy of giving me a physical copy of a game I purchased. A web browser seems like a good place to start for this question. Why hasn't it been done when it seems like more than enough would be interested. Not even feature filled fleshed out browser, just a proof of concept, minimal browser that can handle a modern web page without the drawbacks mentioned formerly. I know about some other small browsers e.g. dillo that are old and break a lot are there any project like that, but modern?
This one kills me the most, I don't really care about ram, the biggest framerates but huge waste of disk space is a real kick in the nuts
Jaxon Hernandez
Of all the things wrong with browsers, you complain about this? 200MB for a complex tool is absolutely acceptable, what's not acceptable is individual apps all shipping with their own copy of chromium. That's a good complaint, lazy devs not compressing audio and textures at all should be shot. The standards are incredibly complicated, and the situation is not helped by google breaking them intentionally to sabotage non-chrome browsers. On top of that, the standards are very hard to implement progressively due to the cascading nature of CSS and a bunch of other quirks.
Robert Long
And why not? How much more bloated is chromium compared to windows, gtk, or qt? HTML+CSS is so vastly superior to every other GUI framework ever devised it's not even a question. Why would any new app be made in anything else?
Connor Davis
Because web browsers are complex tools, not small libraries. Including an entire browser is like shipping your program as a bootable disk with a complete copy of Ubuntu that has your software installed in it. A lot more, because it's much more general purpose than "UI framework". It's like asking how much more bloated a full Linux install is compared to notepad.exe. Doubt.tiff Any sane GUI framework does not have cascading style rules as the default. Also: no major differences between implementations, no external forces changing the standard daily, and decent backwards and forward compatibility. Even if you decided to use web tech for the UI, you could always open a web page and let the user interact there, it's a pretty common thing already with routers and local servers.
Christian Lee
Found pajeet.
David Thompson
its not dead, its in the "do it as fast and dirty you can"
Samuel Taylor
Game assets take a lot of space dude. It's not just code or libraries.
