Dillo 2.0 is fast, but limited

That it's fast but limited.....kind of like links...(though I think links actually has js support these days)

On my older machines, I always install and very often use Dillo for sites that it "plays well" with, including LXer (with cookies turned on for this site). I still have a "big" browser like Opera or Firefox for when I need it, but when I'm running 233 MHz with 144 MB, it's nice to have Dillo, which fits that profile a whole lot better than a full-featured browser.

I haven't tried the new Dillo yet, but I had no complaints whatsoever about speed in the old version.

Both Dillo and Links are good tests for the overall suckiness factor-- if you can read everything important with them, then the site is OK. If it's all larded down with Flash and pointless scripting and bad scripting and inline popup ads (GAH I hate those. Hate. Hate. Hate. Hate.) (Hate.) and you don't dare move your cursor because something will pounce at you, then a pox on them and move on. (One more Hate.)

Amen TC. My web dev philosophy is to avoid all client side scripting whenever possible. Just because you CAN do something in JS doesn't mean you SHOULD. And don't get me started on flash....*gag*

And yeah, I'm one of those people who browses with noscript on. If I want to see your scripts, I'll let em load.

In my shop, nobody thinks twice about loading up on Flash and Javascript. The notion that somebody doesn't have a Flash-equipped browser or is blocking scripting is completely alien ...

Unfortunately that seems to be the general practice these days. I think much of it is because students are taught to code using fancy proprietary products and taught how to do flash and js etc. etc. but are never taught the core basics of good web design and development. I.E. they are taught to write web pages that impress managers. Who cares if they are usable by the whole population or not.... "What do you mean, not everyone has broadband and not everyone uses flash?"

My flash functionality has died, some three-four weeks ago, and it's becoming very frustrating with the number of sites that just _pile_ flash into everything.

The wife just tells me it's because of my high-maintenance Linux install, as opposed to her working XP system (where I.E. has become so broken that even she is forced to use Firefox).

Ugh.

Let's see if Dillo is available in the Debian archives....

All things mentioned above is why I always tell potential employers that "yes, I can do many things, but NOT, ever, any web development. Ever. Not." (Well, OK, it's rather something like "I'd rather not", but it's only to seem rational and balanced). On the front-end, I'm totally sick of the mentality. On the back-end... I'm bored.

Being a user is another story, though.

I've done "web development" (actually web design, not development) both for pay and for fun. The nice thing about the paying job was that it was for a data security company; when I pointed out to them that any client-side code (JavaScript or Flash) was a potential security hole, their response was quite favorable.

I really liked working for that company.