6 ms·
See also: "minimalist web browser" and the history of Firefox :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#History
by zacharypinter 11y ago
See also: "minimalist web browser" and the history of Firefox :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox#History
- jerf 11y agoYup, that one was certainly big for a while! KHTML and its whole menagerie of browsers competing to be more "minimal" than the last. I think the web has stabbed that one dead, though... ship a proper HTML5-compliant browser engine, and, well, you're already looking at a whackload of startup time and tons of functionality. The size of the chrome is hardly an afterthought nowadays. A really "minimal" browser can hardly browse the top-ten sites anymore. (Wikipedia's still looking pretty good in Lynx, though... just checked.)
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoTry: the web itself. The amount you need to be able to do to just load a basically-plaintext webpage now is absurd.
- knodi123 11y agothat's a really good point. I used to browse http over telnet because my boss couldn't tell I wasn't hard at work. Needless to say, I can no longer do that.
- oblio 11y agohttp://www.jwz.org/doc/easter-eggs.html http://www.jwz.org/doc/easter-eggs.html My all time favorite reply about bloat: "X is big because your needs are big" (in the article X = Mozilla).