omniweb roadmap?

[macsterdam]

I was wondering if any of the developers is willing to share some info regarding OW's development roadmap with users here. As much as I like Omniweb, I find I mostly use Camino because it uses way less ram, less cpu and has find-as-you-type.

I'm told that ram-use is not so much an OW issue, but is directly related to WebKit, same goes for cpu use. Now, I don't know it that is true or not, although I do notice I have the same problems with Safari, which I stopped using as well.

So, with regards to these and questions posted by users here, I'd love to here from you Omni-people where you see OW's development going and, if at all possible, what time-frame you have in mind.

thanks

[Chiller]

I second this request. Any project has a timing chart to track progress against. Please share with the forum faithful.

[mihnat]

I do agree that Camino shines for speed, like FF shines for features and Safari shines for.......something, I am sure.

IMHO OW shines because of its customer service (best in the world), tab thumbnails (now I can't use a browser lacking them), plugins for PDFs etc. which work seemlessly, a more Mac (vs Mozilla) look, the ability to set parameters for each web site (popup blocker, identification of web browser (allowing almost every site to work seemlessly), open in tab or window, autofill, etc.).

[mihnat]

PS- The analogy of Windows being the ultra physically strong but somewhat mentally and creatively challenged weight lifter with Mac being the strong, agile, and smart gymnist applies here. I guess what I am trying to say is if you like the Windows way of spending lots of time trouble-shooting your system when loading new sites, plugins, preference panes, etc. go with Mozilla. However, if you like Mac for its ease-of-use and stability, go with OW. It, like all Omni programs, typifies what is and has been best with Mac since its inception.

[macsterdam]

I agree Omniweb is a beautiful and powerful browser - well worth the money. Still, there's room for improvement. Ram-use is definitely an issue. Camino rarely uses over 100mb, while webkit-based browsers such as OW easily gobble up anything over 250mb. For me, that's not acceptable.

So, some feedback on this, other issues, plus a glimpse of where the omni-people see OW heading would be most welcome.

[mihnat]

Agreed macsterdam. Since your message I have been monitoring OW as compared to Camino 1.5.4 for Intel I have noticed that OW does use a bit more memory and is a bit slower overall, but not night and day. I have also noticed the Camino is more stable and has less glitches than previous versions, which is nice. OW is so darn stable that we get spoiled. I am certain that the future iterations of OW will make the best use of Intel and Leopard and will spank Camino's now more formidable contents folder. HINT HINT!

I think the best part of the Omni programs are the amazing folks on the forums and in tech support. It makes it a very nice experience..and isn't that what life is all about?
Peace.

[Chiller]

I think that this thread was addressing how the OmniGroup communicates their plans for OmniWeb. A roadmap. That is all. I do not care to discuss in this thread the comparisons between OmniWeb, Firefox. etc..

[macsterdam]

thanks, that's indeed all I'm interested in!

[zottel]

Just a guess: They probably won't. And that's for an easy reason: If they tell people what they intend to do, and even more, WHEN they intend to do this, they will be nailed down to what they have said, regardless of whether they also said that they didn't know if they could fulfill their schedule.

Working on software is often a business of bad surprises. It looked so easy in the beginning, then you think about what it will take accomplish what you want, and it suddenly becomes much more complicated, and even when you think you have thought of all the consequences and errors your new feature might have, your first version will often show that there were so many problems that just didn't come to mind at the time you thought about it.

Which means: You start working on something and project a time for it that is about 1,5 or 2 times the time you actually think you will need. And in many cases, this time will still not suffice for actually accomplishing what you had in mind. And sometimes, it doesn't work at all or becomes so vastly complicated that it is abandoned altogther.

Now what if you have told people that this feature that you now have to abandon for complexity will be present in the next version? Not a nice prospect at all.

That's why software companies normally don't talk about new features that aren't near complete already.

[Handycam]

A roadmap doesn't exactly mean a schedule. I think the poster just wanted an indication of where it's going.

[Forrest]

zottel, FWIW I think most experienced software developers don't have that problem. For the majority of work my work does for clients, we estimate a flat fee and stick to it. If we go over, we don't bill extra. I know most software companies don't bill that way.

Internally, we're even more strict on some projects, but we also have some where there's no timeframe at all.

It really comes down to priorities. The OG could easily come up with an exact timeframe for releases. However, the perspective I have of them is that they have higher priorities than keeping to a schedule. I would say judging by results, they like a little confusion and uncertainty to avoid compromises in their priorities.

[Tacitus]

A roadmap doesn't exactly mean a schedule. I think the poster just wanted an indication of where it's going.

One thing I would like to know is whether the next version of OW will be Leopard only. The next version of Graffle requires 10.5 and it seems a lot of apps (not just Omni) may be going this way.....

[Ilgaz]

If Omni Group posted the features planned for next Major release, you would better switch to Firefox since every single feature impresses you would show up as a "extension" without a single credit to Omni group :)

I saw what happened to Opera ASA "Quick Dial" feature. Transferred to Firefox in 3-4 days as an extension without credit.

[philonous]

Well, it looks like OW is just struggling to keep up with the latest webkit releases. There haven't been any new significant features in OW in quite some time.

[marc]

It has been a little while since we've heard much on OW's longer-term future, so a basic roadmap, or statement of intent would be welcome.

Perhaps a statement of their priorities in synching with WebKit changes vs adding requested features, perhaps some indication as to whether to expect an OW6 release in '08.

As paying customers we are owed a little bit more than an open source project, but it's true that they can't play their hand too openly either.

...+1 for a little more openness (conveniently near Macworld, where we'll hopefully get some updates anyway!)

[Ilgaz]

I am saying this to be exact.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/2008/01/firefox_workspa.html

This is the open source browser scene of 2007, like or not.

I hate the fact that everyone gets the ideas from our paid browser and calls us "stupid" a while later for paying for a browser.

It was the same deal while I was a registered/paid Opera for Windows user too.

[philonous]

Now that I am totally getting back into OW (I went back to Safari+Stand for a while), I am only curious about one thing: form autofill. Will this feature work again? It was working for me about 50% of the time, but now it's completely broken. This is the absolute last thing that OW needs to work (at least for me).

Payam