hi all
is there any plans to support java applets, java script 1.3+, client
style sheets, html 4+ and like this in some future versions of voyager ?
i.e. is there any hope that voyager will become a real internet browser ?
–
Thanks for your attention,
Ian M. Zagorskih, Software Developer, Novosoft Ltd.
E-Mail: ianzag@pochta.net ICQ 28632525
Web: http://www.novosoft.ru
// wbr
I’d love to get an answer for this as well. I’m just beginning to learn
about QNX and am dying to get my hands on a copy of Neutrino. Having a
browser with small memory requirements is great, but if it’s not able to
implement Java this will be a real drawback. Perhaps in theory it may be
possible to port Netscape, but I’m guessing this would be difficult. It
would also be inconsistent with Neutrino’s “mission” of small size, wouldn’t
it?
Just some thoughts from a newbie.
Greg
herring7(at)hotmail.com
PS: Would anyone be willing to loan me a Neutrino CD? I’d be very
grateful. I’m in the US.
ian zagorskih wrote:
hi all
is there any plans to support java applets, java script 1.3+, client
style sheets, html 4+ and like this in some future versions of voyager ?
i.e. is there any hope that voyager will become a real internet browser ?–
Thanks for your attention,
Ian M. Zagorskih, Software Developer, Novosoft Ltd.
E-Mail: > ianzag@pochta.net > ICQ 28632525
Web: > http://www.novosoft.ru// wbr
Perhaps in theory it may be
possible to port Netscape, but I’m guessing this would be difficult.
The beta RTP cd includes a port of mozilla
Stephen Thomas wrote in message <8lafqm$gdr$1@inn.qnx.com>…
Perhaps in theory it may be
possible to port Netscape, but I’m guessing this would be difficult.The beta RTP cd includes a port of mozilla
you mean qnx4 platform is almost dead and will not be developed futher
in the future ?
// wbr
there is a 3rd party java vm out there: tao-systems. don’t know the
URL right now.
ian zagorskih schrieb:
Stephen Thomas wrote in message <8lafqm$gdr$> 1@inn.qnx.com> >…
Perhaps in theory it may be
possible to port Netscape, but I’m guessing this would be difficult.The beta RTP cd includes a port of mozilla
you mean qnx4 platform is almost dead and will not be developed futher
in the future ?// wbr
Joerg Kampmann
IBK-Consult - (embedded Systems)
WWW: http://www.ibk-consult.de
In article <8las4r$jmp$1@flute.sinor.ru>, "ian says…
Stephen Thomas wrote in message <8lafqm$gdr$> 1@inn.qnx.com> >…
Perhaps in theory it may be
possible to port Netscape, but I’m guessing this would be difficult.The beta RTP cd includes a port of mozilla
you mean qnx4 platform is almost dead and will not be developed futher
in the future ?
Depends on what you mean with ‘developed further’ … further developing of the
core of QNX 4 (threads, preemptable kernel services, more than 32 or 3 hard RT
priorities, SMP e.g. …) will clearly never happen because QSSL is not going to
build QNY/Neutrino twice.
That means if Netscape/Mozilla needs threads → the target platform is RTP and
not QNX4 …
Regards
Armin
Armin Steinhoff wrote in message <8lbudo$k33@drn.newsguy.com>…
In article <8las4r$jmp$> 1@flute.sinor.ru> >, "ian says…
Stephen Thomas wrote in message <8lafqm$gdr$> 1@inn.qnx.com> >…
Perhaps in theory it may be
possible to port Netscape, but I’m guessing this would be difficult.The beta RTP cd includes a port of mozilla
you mean qnx4 platform is almost dead and will not be developed futher
in the future ?Depends on what you mean with ‘developed further’ … further developing of
the
core of QNX 4 (threads, preemptable kernel services, more than 32 or 3 hard
RT
priorities, SMP e.g. …) will clearly never happen because QSSL is not
going to
build QNY/Neutrino twice.
of couse i don’t mean the reimplementation of basic qnx4 kernel
services,
they are build perfect in the borders how qssl see microlernel architecture
for
qnx4, but good kernel isn’t enough for fast and quality development in such
environment…
That means if Netscape/Mozilla needs threads → the target platform is RTP
and
not QNX4 …
…as an example: voyager. we use following link for maintaining our
project’s report
system: sybase sql anywere → perl5 scripts + html temlates-> slinger http
server →
voyager as an html viewer. works quite well and dosn’t neet too high
resources, i.e.
all this stuff + a lot of another processess work in 8-12 mb of ram. is
there any hope
that with qrtp + smth like this + mozila hardware requirements will be the
same ?
not so sure, i’v worked with mozila and afair x windows + mozila & 8mb of
ram two
absolutelly incompatible things. so that’s why we for example choose
qnx4+photon+
voyager etc and don’t choose for example linux or free bsd.
but today voyager features arn’t enough for us, i need for example
support of
client style sheets in voyager in order to format reports proper way, java
support
in order to reimplement some interface from phab’s drawn to pure
html+css+java
and maybe java script, and etc. there’s no such things in voyager and as a
result
was born the question: is there any hope that they will be avialbe in
voyager or not ?
of couse, maybe it is slightly more easy sollution just to port mozila under
qrtp and after
the release tell the world that qssl’s realtime platform supports anything
and anywhere,
but what’s the cost of such sollution for end user in comparison with old
good qnx4 ?
if it requires minimum pentium 120+32mb of memory there’s no reasons to use
qrtp,
linux or free bsd works well enough on such hardware and in their world no
problems
with development evironments and in general tonns of all the native stuff
that should be
“just ported” under qrtp.
Regards
Armin
// wbr