View Full Version : Periodic OW 5.6 Inquiry
philonous
2007-04-26, 08:51 PM
Oh, as I like to do about once a month, I am writing to find out if there is any news regarding OW5.6. Clearly, Omniplan is a higher priority for Omnigroup at the moment.
P
andreas_g
2007-04-28, 06:20 AM
it's really time for OW 5.6
one of my favorit sites "http://www.wetterring.at" does not work with OW 5.5.x.
bazokajoe_2k
2007-04-28, 05:55 PM
From what I understand, in order to update OW to the latest version of WebKit, they have to rewrite a substantial amount of OW to deal with the changes that have happened. Thus, it's taking longer for 5.6 than I'm sure anybody wants.
mwayne
2007-04-29, 04:45 AM
it's really time for OW 5.6
one of my favorit sites "http://www.wetterring.at" does not work with OW 5.5.x.
I went to the site in question with no problems using the following version so it may be one of your settings.
Product: OmniWeb-5.5
Tag: OmniWeb-5.5.4-v607.17
Date: 2007-02-14 13:47:05 -0800
Builder: rachael
Host: tb104.private.omnigroup.com
Revision: 83898MS
Cheers
andreas_g
2007-04-29, 05:10 AM
@ mwayne:
did you see the white numbers on the map or did you see kind of input boxes all over the map?
iSean1
2007-05-01, 09:53 PM
@ mwayne:
did you see the white numbers on the map or did you see kind of input boxes all over the map?
I see all kinds of input boxes all over the map with 5.5.4 (v607.17). Safari seems to display it the same way. By way of comparison Firefox 2.0.0.3 had no issues.
danielandrews
2007-05-02, 05:04 AM
I can't wait for 5.6 either. However, I have a hunch that as soon as they have something to tell us regarding the status, they will.
The Omni guys want to get a kick-ass update out the door as much as we want to use it.
asiufy
2007-05-02, 07:12 AM
I can't wait for 5.6 either. However, I have a hunch that as soon as they have something to tell us regarding the status, they will.
The Omni guys want to get a kick-ass update out the door as much as we want to use it.
I don't doubt that they want a kick ass update, what I doubt is their commitment to it.
It's very frustrating having to live with a self-imploding browser, while the company tinkers with all sorts of other applications. My guess is that they know they have a loyal following in their current customer base, and the app is "good enough" as it is, so instead of making improvements, they just let it be while they create other applications, so they can get more money from their captive user base...
Anyway, I've love to be proven wrong, and see Omni release at least the first sneaky peeks soon.
Forrest
2007-05-02, 08:56 AM
I don't doubt that they want a kick ass update, what I doubt is their commitment to it.
It's very frustrating having to live with a self-imploding browser, while the company tinkers with all sorts of other applications. My guess is that they know they have a loyal following in their current customer base, and the app is "good enough" as it is, so instead of making improvements, they just let it be while they create other applications, so they can get more money from their captive user base...
Anyway, I've love to be proven wrong, and see Omni release at least the first sneaky peeks soon.
I'm just guessing here, but I think you're partially right and wrong. One thing to note is that Len Case seems to have had a child, and he was one of the main OW guys. His forum profile here is no longer one of an Omni employee. So I think they may be a man down right now.
I also think that the changes to Web Kit that they now have to deal with, may not be solid and they're somewhat waiting for a better version of WebKit to use before they redo a bunch of work. That said, I do know progress is still being made on 5.6.
troyb
2007-05-02, 03:52 PM
Hi everyone,
Sorry for the silence on our part. Forest has made a keen observation, the OmniWeb development team lost one of its two primary developers several months ago which has unfortunately slowed the process down a bit. This however doesn't affect our commitment to OmniWeb and we aren't ignoring our customer base. It's just taking time to get the release out.
We know users have issues with 5.5.4 and our hope is that 5.6 will correct many of them. The in development version of WebKit that we're based off of is getting very stable and many of the issues that exist in 5.5.4 have been corrected. During its development process new issues have been introduced and we felt it safer to stick with the modified version of WebKit we have in 5.5.4 rather than update too early. This brings fewer updates but we don't introduce a flood of new bugs and regressions into the mix, even if it means fixing others. We've also had to rework some OmniWeb features which has taken time.
So we've been keeping silent on public releases of 5.6 while we tidy up the bugs and issues that have appeared. Things are coming together though. 5.6 is becoming very usable and a beta is drawing closer. Some of the biggest issues with the update have been recently addressed or soon will be and we're in a position where WebKit is stabilizing which is great news!
Even though OmniFocus and OmniPlan are popular topics on our blog and elsewhere, we're still thinking about and working on OmniWeb too.
sriggins
2007-05-03, 08:50 AM
Its my dream that you can work with apple to get whatever hooks into Webkit you need so you don't need to keep modifying it. I'll feel much better as a customer when I can use OW with a nightly webkit and have it work. :)
troyb
2007-05-03, 02:01 PM
Hi again everyone. It came to my attention that I may have implied that there is not going to be a new WebKit in OmniWeb 5.6. That is not the case, the primary goal for 5.6 is to update WebKit, sorry for any confusion I may have caused.
danielandrews
2007-05-04, 09:42 AM
Thank you for the update!
Thanks for keeping us all informed...
now where the ****** is OmniWeb 6?!?! .. just kidding ! ;-)
daiyi666@yahoo.com
2007-05-05, 01:24 PM
now where the ****** is OmniWeb 6?!?! .. just kidding ! ;-)
I want my money back. Just kidding as well.
Looking forward to OmniFocus coming out in beta soon.
Keep up the great work OG.
FredH
2007-06-06, 01:26 PM
Another month goes by...
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/145786038_84d21cc680_m.jpg
danielandrews
2007-06-06, 03:21 PM
Another month goes by...
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/145786038_84d21cc680_m.jpg
Every time there is a new post to the Omni Mouth blog that shows up in my rss reader, a little part of me dies when I see it's not Omniweb related.
philonous
2007-06-07, 01:34 PM
Every time there is a new post to the Omni Mouth blog that shows up in my rss reader, a little part of me dies when I see it's not Omniweb related.
I don't know if I am proud of it, but I do share this sentiment, profoundly.
Payam
Oblique Strategy
2007-06-07, 05:19 PM
I don't know if I am proud of it, but I do share this sentiment, profoundly.
Same here.
I can't say I'm "mad" at OmniGroup in any way, but when I see five entries for OmniPlan and OmniFocus related developments I just cringe.
philonous
2007-06-08, 05:58 PM
And, we experienced it again, today. :(
philby
2007-06-11, 12:06 PM
Mmmhhh... I wonder if maybe Omni is working on OmniWeb for Windows?
Mmmhhh... I wonder if maybe Omni is working on OmniWeb for Windows?
Probably not, but it does seem like Safari has just acquired a lot of the functionality that I use OmniWeb for. I guess my question is how much of the tab rearrangement code is part of Safari itself and how much is is WebKit.
For me, OmniWeb is becoming increasingly unusable on my PowerBook G4 -- I may have a pathological usage case, but I find that the app swaps a lot and becomes agonizingly slow. I will be replacing this machine very soon, but experiments on a new MacBook last week were showing many of the same bad behaviors.
I hope that Omni will update OmniWeb and get things working well again, but if not, I feel like I've more than gotten my money's worth over the years I've used it.
Mr. H
2007-06-11, 01:15 PM
Hello Omni people? Any news? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaasssse?
MacAddict4Life
2007-06-19, 12:47 PM
What I want to know, besides when we get OW 5.6, is if it using the same WebKit version as Safari 3, or is it using an older or newer version?
troyb
2007-06-19, 01:18 PM
What I want to know, besides when we get OW 5.6, is if it using the same WebKit version as Safari 3, or is it using an older or newer version?
We're currently working with a version of WebKit that is based off of revision 22076 from around june 8th. The Safari beta uses a custom version of WebKit as well and looks like the latest one tagged as Safari-522.12.1b was done so on June 13th so it's probably from a revision around that time as well. They appear to be merging custom changes in like we do so the nightlies and the 3.0 beta will probably diverge a bit.
We hope to get a beta of OmniWeb 5.6 out soon. Sorry for the wait everyone.
WebJIVE
2007-06-19, 01:59 PM
Thanks for the update. The ONE feature that I really like about Safar3 is support (finally) for WYSIWYG editors like TinyMCE.
Then I can keep FF relegated to deep website development chores since the most useful plugin (I wish there were a OW/S3 equivalent) I have is Firebug. It has really freed up web site development time for me.
We hope to get a beta of OmniWeb 5.6 out soon. Sorry for the wait everyone.
Finally. Harrummphh.
Ilgaz
2007-06-21, 02:59 AM
We're currently working with a version of WebKit that is based off of revision 22076 from around june 8th. The Safari beta uses a custom version of WebKit as well and looks like the latest one tagged as Safari-522.12.1b was done so on June 13th so it's probably from a revision around that time as well. They appear to be merging custom changes in like we do so the nightlies and the 3.0 beta will probably diverge a bit.
We hope to get a beta of OmniWeb 5.6 out soon. Sorry for the wait everyone.
Don't hurry on same webkit as Safari 3 beta, I didn't like what I hear from Windows version.
Yes, those 10 security issues in 3 hours really made me question whether it was a quick and dirty compile just to show something at WWDC.
I know they are Windows issues but how can we get true info/true critism/true security check of OS X version?
danielandrews
2007-06-21, 01:32 PM
Thanks for the update. The ONE feature that I really like about Safar3 is support (finally) for WYSIWYG editors like TinyMCE.
Then I can keep FF relegated to deep website development chores since the most useful plugin (I wish there were a OW/S3 equivalent) I have is Firebug. It has really freed up web site development time for me.
The new (as in webkit nightlies, not safari 3 beta) safari inspector is easily on par with firebug.
Handycam
2007-06-21, 03:39 PM
The new (as in webkit nightlies, not safari 3 beta) safari inspector is easily on par with firebug.
Agreed. It's also way better than anything in OW.
Between this and new features like the resizable text areas, OW is falling further behind by the week.
I know they are Windows issues but how can we get true info/true critism/true security check of OS X version?
WebKit is entirely OSS. There isn't anything to hide.
zottel
2007-06-23, 04:27 PM
We hope to get a beta of OmniWeb 5.6 out soon. Sorry for the wait everyone.
Is there anything like at least a vague timeframe you could give us? I'm not the annoying kind of user, normally, but the JS bug has been around for just too long now; the current version hasn't been updated for quite some time ... All in all, the feeling of using OW has fallen from "top notch" to "nice features, but outdated".
What about sneaky peek versions like pre5.5? Nobody expected perfect stability or all features working then, nobody would expect these now. It was fun to take part in testing and reporting bugs, and everyone was satisfied even though not everything was working—we could see the progress in every new version we downloaded, and that's the point. It's frustrating not to know what's going on and having to cope with a browser that's great in its features but not really stable and limited in terms of compatibility.
Just my 5ct.
What's to say that there aren't sneaky peeks of 5.6? Regardless of whether there are or not, it is self-evident that OmniWeb has been relegated to being "not of much importance" at OmniGroup since OmniPlan and OmniFocus have become the darlings of their development cycle. It is now over a year since the first 5.5 sneaky peek was out, and the JS bug still remains unfixed. That is exceptionally poor treatment of your customers, by anyone's book.
zottel
2007-06-23, 05:11 PM
So you're even more angry than I am. :-) Or rather :-(
It took some time till the JS bug was fixed in WebKit, but still this was rather long ago, so it's more than about time that we get a working OW.
Personally, I'd be satisfied if at least I could use some beta versions of 5.6 and really see that there's work being done. But all the "wait for 5.6", "we hope (!) to be releasing 5.6 soon", "sorry for the wait" stuff has really been going on for far too long now.
Chiller
2007-06-23, 07:11 PM
What's to say that there aren't sneaky peeks of 5.6? Regardless of whether there are or not, it is self-evident that OmniWeb has been relegated to being "not of much importance" at OmniGroup since OmniPlan and OmniFocus have become the darlings of their development cycle. It is now over a year since the first 5.5 sneaky peek was out, and the JS bug still remains unfixed. That is exceptionally poor treatment of your customers, by anyone's book.
I agree as well. It can't be a matter of communication because the Omni Group blog is update fairly often. With the exception of Safari, just about all other browsers have their status published on a regular basis or the work is visible to see from others.
Omni Group. Look, it's like this. I really like your browser. I am a licensed user of 3 of your products. I would like to respectfully request a little more detail than soon. 2Q? 3Q? 4Q?
mshalperin
2007-06-23, 10:48 PM
Unfortunately, OW never developed much market share in the non-Safari OS X market - possibly because it's the only non-free product from a company looking for sales profits. The developers of the free browsers obtain their revenue and support by other means. The Omni Group lowered the price but this hasn't had much impact. They probably decided to shift their development resources into more profitable products. I suspect that if it isn't sold to another developer, it may be soon dead in the water. In contrast, Shira, which is free, released v2.1 on 6/19 "to support new Web Kit, installed by Safari 3.0."
Jon Hicks
2007-06-23, 11:31 PM
I was also hoping that the move to webkit would mean less hassle for the developers, but it seems as though they still have to spend a long time adding their customisations to WebKit in order to retain those Omniweb features. Time between releases is just as long as it always was.
I guess what I would like to know is not so much 'when will 5.6 beta come out?' more 'is there a life for Omniweb after 5.6?'. Are Omnigroup still committed to developing it?
Ken Case
2007-06-24, 09:41 AM
Sorry if things have seemed quiet on our end: we're just as anxious to get 5.6 out there as everyone else, and we've been putting continuous effort into 5.6 since before we even shipped 5.5.
We adopted the Leopard version of WebKit in our 5.5.x releases, which was great because it was much faster, included a lot more web features, and fixed some Tiger WebKit bugs. Unfortunately, midway through the Leopard WebKit cycle Apple introduced a very major architectural change to WebKit, where they reimplemented forms to no longer use native Mac OS X widgets. Reimplementing all those widgets from scratch had some big upsides for web compatibility (and probably for the iPhone as well)—but these new untested widgets introduced hundreds of bugs in the way web form widgets work, so we decided we couldn't ship something based on that work until they got through those bugs. We branched 5.6 to start tracking Apple's latest work (which we tried to merge with our code base every week or two) while simultaneously trying to cherry-pick some fixes which could also help 5.5 and apply them back to the our 5.5.x releases (which, remember, were based on a work-in-progress Leopard WebKit). As time went on, though, more and more of the new fixes couldn't be applied to 5.5 (the code was too intertwined with their new forms implementation)—but we felt that the version of WebKit underlying 5.6 still wasn't ready to go into a shipping release.
Thus, the apparent limbo of the last few months.
We haven't just been sitting on our hands, of course: not only have we continued to track the latest WebKit development in OmniWeb 5.6, we've still had a lot of work to do ourselves to reimplement our enhanced forms on top of the new non-native widget base (features such as zoomed editing, text completion, and saved state in Workspaces), and just to continue testing with each new integration of WebKit to make sure our other features (such as ad blocking) don't break as they continue rearchitecting the framework.
Most of that work was just a one-time thing, though, reimplementing our features on top of the new form widgets. We then hit a period where integrating with the latest changes to WebKit would generally take us just a few hours—but we were still waiting for WebKit itself to get stable enough to ship something to you.
Finally, a ray of hope appeared a few months ago, when Apple decided that they would start focusing their WebKit effort on stabilizing the features they already had (such as fixing those hundreds of new form widget bugs) rather than continuing to introduce new features (destabilizing things even more), and since then they've fixed most of the forms bugs that we thought it would be unreasonable to include in a shipping, supported browser. (Apparently they think so, too, since they just shipped a beta release of Safari 3.0.)
I've had both OmniWeb 5.6 and OmniWeb 5.5.4 on my dock for months, trying to spend most of my time in 5.6 but having to switch back to 5.5.4 regularly as I encountered problems in the new WebKit. But it's been getting better each month, and it's now been a few weeks since I've had to launch 5.5.4—which seems like a good indicator that we have something we could share with all of you. At this point there are just a few more regressions from 5.5 which we're trying to fix:
<bug://bugs/35924> (Regression: From third-party sites ad block setting doesn't work)
<bug://bugs/38732> (Regression: "Load All Images" doesn't seem to work)
<bug://bugs/37286> (Regression: WorkspacesLoadFromCache no longer works)
<bug://bugs/37431> (Regression: Workspace scroll position is not restored on launch / reload)
<bug://bugs/35921> (Regression: Form Data isn't restored between workspace launches)
As you can see, this list is getting pretty short and most of these issues aren't so bad to live with (at least, not relative to the pain of using 5.6 through the last nine months). In fact, the most important thing to me on that list is third-party site ad blocking, but that setting seems to be working for me so I'm not sure why it's still listed. (Maybe there's some detail in the implementation that we want to redo?)
Again, I'm sorry that things have seemed quiet on our end, and that 5.6 has taken so long! We originally thought that Leopard would be shipping by now, so we didn't imagine it would take nearly this long for its version of WebKit to reach a stable state. But the good news is that we think we're very close to shipping a 5.6 beta (perhaps with some of the above issues listed as known issues).
philonous
2007-06-24, 09:49 AM
Wow. Thanks for the detailed reply. You know that a lot of people are looking forward to the next beta. Don't forget how many people participated in the sneaky peek debugging last year. So, if that program was helpful, it may be fruitful to bring it back.
Payam
Ken Case
2007-06-24, 09:52 AM
I was also hoping that the move to webkit would mean less hassle for the developers, but it seems as though they still have to spend a long time adding their customisations to WebKit in order to retain those Omniweb features. Time between releases is just as long as it always was.
Oh, and just to address this point specifically: now that we're on WebKit, it really has gotten much easier to integrate our changes with Apple's. The big delay in 5.6 has primarily been waiting for WebKit itself to be stable enough to release again.
I guess what I would like to know is not so much 'when will 5.6 beta come out?' more 'is there a life for Omniweb after 5.6?'. Are Omnigroup still committed to developing it?
Yes, we definitely are. Nothing else comes close to the user experience and feature set I expect from my primary web browser.
Jon Hicks
2007-06-24, 11:56 AM
Thanks for all that Ken, its reassuring to know that it's not been abandoned!
Ayjay
2007-06-24, 04:28 PM
Ken, that's a fabulous response -- I really appreciate it. Because of the well-documented issues, I've not been able to use OmniWeb as much as I'd like lately, but nothing else comes close to matching its power and features, so you bring very welcome news indeed.
poppymac
2007-06-24, 08:44 PM
ken thanks for your candor to all of us who are anxiously awaiting the next release! keep up the great work and look forward to a stable beta release
While the detailed feedback is appreciated, would it have hurt to keep us updated earlier? This information is long, long overdue. E.g. the WebKit feature development freeze was announced way back in February, prior to the release of the OmniWeb 5.5.4 update. Would it have hurt to make an announcement then that this would enable you to concentrate on getting OmniWeb 5.6 out the door once the WebKit code had stabliised enough?
Ken, that's a fabulous response -- I really appreciate it. Because of the well-documented issues, I've not been able to use OmniWeb as much as I'd like lately, but nothing else comes close to matching its power and features, so you bring very welcome news indeed.
Unfortunately, this just isn't true any more. You can get very close to OmniWeb's feature set with Firefox and just a few extensions (e.g. Tab Mix Plus together with Showcase or Tab Catalog) or even Safari with Safaristand. Some of the features that TMP provides in Firefox even supersede what OmniWeb has to offer.
About the only feature that Firefox doesn't have a truly adequate replacement for (other than good integration with the OS, of course) is Workspaces. TMP in Firefox and Safaristand in Safari enables you to save sessions, but using those saved sessions is poorly implemented. While OmniWeb 5.0 blew other browsers out of the water in terms of features, those other browsers have since caught up (and passed OmniWeb in other areas) and there are few compelling features that remain unique to OmniWeb.
Handycam
2007-06-25, 06:37 AM
While OmniWeb 5.0 blew other browsers out of the water in terms of features, those other browsers have since caught up (and passed OmniWeb in other areas) and there are few compelling features that remain unique to OmniWeb.
I have to agree here. With OW 5.x falling so far behind the others in terms of rendering and js bugs, I found myself first using Safari with SafariStand and AdBlock and having most of the functionality of OW. Then I reluctantly moved to Firefox and found it to be an excellent browser, and -- best of all -- instead of pleading on this forum for new features I could, for the most part, add the feature I wanted with extensions.
The main reason I liked OW was for the UI. I also used workspaces a bit, but found them too much work for what I got out of it. The pop-up text fields were nice, but I frankly prefer the latest WebKit ones (I'm using it right now). The drawer now feels clumsy and dated -- very "early OSX". Right now, IMO, the most attractive UI is on Shiira, but there are a lot of problems and missing features (e.g. ad blocking) that keep me from using Shiira.
I would think that OW is not very profitable for Omni any longer, and the work required to keep it up to date has proved more daunting than expected. IMO, for there to be a compelling reason to use it (much less buy it) it needs to once again be as advanced as it once was. I think they should work toward the latest webkit, use the Apple form fields, and please include the Inspector from the latest nightlies.
Ken Case
2007-06-25, 07:45 AM
While the detailed feedback is appreciated, would it have hurt to keep us updated earlier? This information is long, long overdue.
No—and again, I apologize. Until I read this thread (I saw it for the first time yesterday), I didn't realize that we hadn't done a good job of keeping you all in the loop as to exactly why we hadn't yet released OmniWeb 5.6.
When you've been living with a set of assumptions for a long time, it's easy to forget that you might not have communicated those assumptions to everyone else. We originally planned to ship 5.5 with this version of WebKit, so we've been living with this "As soon as WebKit's stable again we'll ship" assumption for over a year now. It wasn't until I read this thread that I realized that people thought the delay was due to lack of interest on our part, rather than lack of readiness of the underlying framework.
As soon as I realized that there was a misunderstanding, I immediately sat down (on Sunday morning, with my daughters clamoring for my attention) and wrote that explanation.
Handycam
2007-06-25, 08:42 AM
Thanks Ken.
How about a "sneaky peek" beta cycle again, with the usual caveats? At least then perhaps we could USE omniweb again.
Chiller
2007-06-25, 07:34 PM
Thank you very much Ken for your reply. The update is much appreciated. I am also glad you read the forums as well. Hey, no one is perfect. As OmniWeb users we naturally have discriminating taste and just want the same thing you do; a great browsing experience. Thanks again and maybe you can post some updates on the blog site.
Handycam
2007-06-26, 08:47 AM
This thread had made it to the MacUser blog (http://www.macuser.com/internet/the_fickle_love_of_a_browser_u.php), the author saying what many of us have here.
Ayjay
2007-06-26, 09:13 AM
It's true that, as Jonathan and Handycam say, there are other browsers that replicate most (though not all) the features of OmniWeb. But they do so via third-party plug-ins and mods that suffer from various degrees of hackishness. Not all of the Firefox add-ons work equally reliably, in my experience anyway, and when Firefox or Safari is updated you often find yourself faced with the choice of (a) delaying the update for quite a while or (b) having your add-ons broken. OmniWeb remains the only browser that has the advanced features baked in. I too have been frustrated by the extremely long wait for 5.6, and the javascript bugs have made it temporarily unusable for me, but assuming that those problems are addressed in 5.6, I wouldn't even consider using a browser other than OmniWeb.
troyb
2007-06-26, 10:26 AM
Hey Everyone,
Just a heads up that we're planning on pushing out a sneaky peek tomorrow. Keep an eye out for it here on the forums!
Oblique Strategy
2007-06-26, 11:02 AM
Excellent news, thank you!
It's true that, as Jonathan and Handycam say, there are other browsers that replicate most (though not all) the features of OmniWeb. But they do so via third-party plug-ins and mods that suffer from various degrees of hackishness. Not all of the Firefox add-ons work equally reliably, in my experience anyway, and when Firefox or Safari is updated you often find yourself faced with the choice of (a) delaying the update for quite a while or (b) having your add-ons broken. OmniWeb remains the only browser that has the advanced features baked in. I too have been frustrated by the extremely long wait for 5.6, and the javascript bugs have made it temporarily unusable for me, but assuming that those problems are addressed in 5.6, I wouldn't even consider using a browser other than OmniWeb.
'Tis true about Firefox and Safari (fwiw, I still use OmniWeb in preference to either as Firefox is just not a good browser on the Mac*, and Safaristand is an input manager hack and I don't want input manager hacks on my machine... not to mention it isn't as nice to use as OmniWeb anyway). However, my point was more that the other browsers have caught up in terms of the ability to have these features, and some of the features you can have are better than those in OmniWeb (e.g TMP in Firefox opens tabs next to the parent rather than making you jump to the bottom of the list all the time). I would dearly love to see OmniWeb take another leap in front of Firefox, but it has felt as though development has been in limbo the past six months or more. Largely due to a lack of communication on the part of Ken et al.
* However, I do have to suffer Windows at work and Firefox there is close to being the "glass of ice water for someone in hell" - TMP, Showcase and Tab Catalog are the ice cubes that make it bearable.
philonous
2007-06-26, 08:12 PM
Firefox is just not a good browser on the Mac*, and Safaristand is an input manager hack and I don't want input manager hacks on my machine...
And, I am tired of fishing for FF plugins. Omniweb is like the Macintosh of browsers: all of the most desirable features in one nice package. FF has SO MANY wonderful plugins, but I am tired of fishing for them, installing them, and have hem go AWOL or beta whenever there is a new FF release. I gotta get some work done at some point!
So, I can't wait for the sneaky peek.
Payam
Chucky
2007-06-27, 04:46 AM
I want my history cache to create Spotlight friendly files.
I know this is probably a 6.0 feature, rather than a 5.6 feature, but I want it, and I want it now!!!
Love,
Chucky
Hey Everyone,
Just a heads up that we're planning on pushing out a sneaky peek tomorrow. Keep an eye out for it here on the forums!
Huzzah!
Now I'm going to be obsessively reloading the forum until it's released.
Ironically, given the JavaScript used by this forum, that process will undoubtedly degrade my current OmniWeb instance's performance even further. :P
Oblique Strategy
2007-06-27, 02:19 PM
*Apple-R*
"Crap! Not yet!"
*Apple-R*
Lizard
2007-06-27, 05:21 PM
try again :)
troyb
2007-06-27, 05:32 PM
Just in case people haven't seen the thread :)
http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=3972
zottel
2007-06-29, 12:05 PM
Ah! Finally! Yay! :-)
Since my lost post here I hadn't had he time to look into the forums, and now these good news!
I'm really glad that there IS progress going on, and that there are sneaky peeks out now—actually, I'm already posting wiht the latest one now.
Mysteriously—as this doesn't seem to be desired behaviour—when I restarted the old OW 5.5 today that had been running all the time since my last post, it told it wasn't up to date and the most recent version was OW 5.5 (!) SP 4. X-)
Anyway, glad to be using a freshly updated OW now.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.