Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: WebKitGTK+ 2.0.0 Released With Many New Features

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,799

    Default WebKitGTK+ 2.0.0 Released With Many New Features

    Phoronix: WebKitGTK+ 2.0.0 Released With Many New Features

    After being in development for the past two years, WebKitGTK+ 2.0.0 has been released and it defaults to their new WebKit2GTK+ API...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM0OTI

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default Webkit gtk image scaling

    Webkit-gtk even 3 years after STILL has terrible image scaling.
    Chrome(ium) always had good image scaling.
    Firefox fixed their image scaling a while back. (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=486918)
    Yet webkit gtk has made absolutely no progress on the issue after a whole 3 years (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50703)
    At this rate it'll never be fixed and we'll be stuck with terrible image scaling for every webkit-gtk browser.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maksml View Post
    Webkit-gtk even 3 years after STILL has terrible image scaling.
    Chrome(ium) always had good image scaling.
    Firefox fixed their image scaling a while back. (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=486918)
    Yet webkit gtk has made absolutely no progress on the issue after a whole 3 years (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50703)
    At this rate it'll never be fixed and we'll be stuck with terrible image scaling for every webkit-gtk browser.
    Never noticed any issue's. Isn't this a little overblown?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    Never noticed any issue's. Isn't this a little overblown?
    Look at this in a webkit-gtk based browser
    https://bug486918.bugzilla.mozilla.o....cgi?id=428179

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maksml View Post
    Look at this in a webkit-gtk based browser
    https://bug486918.bugzilla.mozilla.o....cgi?id=428179
    I went to check, and added a screenshot to confirm we are talking about the same thing.

    Code:
    gebruiker@Delta:~$ ldd $(which midori) | grep -i webkit
    	libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0 (0xb53c2000)
    That's 1.



    Left is chromium.
    Right is midori.

    That's 2.

    Hmm, I can live with that really. Why all the fuss? I mean, someone could just propose a patch to change the scaling algorithm. Or is that a 'big deal'?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    I went to check, and added a screenshot to confirm we are talking about the same thing.

    Code:
    gebruiker@Delta:~$ ldd $(which midori) | grep -i webkit
    	libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libwebkitgtk-1.0.so.0 (0xb53c2000)
    That's 1.



    Left is chromium.
    Right is midori.

    That's 2.

    Hmm, I can live with that really. Why all the fuss? I mean, someone could just propose a patch to change the scaling algorithm. Or is that a 'big deal'?
    Why all the fuss? Are you serious?
    Go get some glasses and look again.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maksml View Post
    Why all the fuss? Are you serious?
    Go get some glasses and look again.
    How many sites take huge images and downsample them into tiny images, though? That's just a huge waste of bandwidth.

    Obviously improving this would be nice for browsers, but it's hardly the sort of thing an average user is running into all the time.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    The average user, who has a less-than-fullHD screen, is running to that daily. Even fullHD screens nowadays, when the cat pictures are 16Mpix.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    The average user, who has a less-than-fullHD screen, is running to that daily. Even fullHD screens nowadays, when the cat pictures are 16Mpix.
    I find that hard to believe, if that statement is not a joke. 16MPix cat pictures are somewhat non-existent. Care to share some of them from your private collection to prove otherwise?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,103

    Default

    Sorry, the cat pictures of my friend are private. But are you saying you don't see larger-than-fullHD pictures often?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •