Comments on: QtWeb – An Alternative Browser for Webkit Testing http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/ News, opinion, and fresh thinking for web developers and designers. The official podcast of sitepoint.com. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:39:24 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Hamranhansenhansen http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925220 Hamranhansenhansen Tue, 05 May 2009 19:07:04 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925220 Safari 4 is only 5 megabytes. I don't see how you gain enough here to make it worthwhile. Also, the whole point of QA is to impersonate actual users, so a key thing is to use the software they're actually using. If your stuff runs in Safari 4 then it runs on the Mac and probably the iPhone and iPod. That's 80 million or so highly engaged users. It's worth installing Safari 4 on your Windows box even if it's not your main browser. Safari 4 is only 5 megabytes. I don’t see how you gain enough here to make it worthwhile. Also, the whole point of QA is to impersonate actual users, so a key thing is to use the software they’re actually using.

If your stuff runs in Safari 4 then it runs on the Mac and probably the iPhone and iPod. That’s 80 million or so highly engaged users. It’s worth installing Safari 4 on your Windows box even if it’s not your main browser.

]]> By: BPartch http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925162 BPartch Mon, 04 May 2009 20:18:20 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925162 I like this browser, uses barely any RAM at all. Like mentioned in the article not for day to day browsing, but having it on my thumb drive for testing works great. Thanks for the tip! I like this browser, uses barely any RAM at all. Like mentioned in the article not for day to day browsing, but having it on my thumb drive for testing works great.

Thanks for the tip!

]]> By: Recruit http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925152 Recruit Mon, 04 May 2009 15:21:11 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925152 <blockquote> Craig Buckler Says: May 4th, 2009 at 4:42 pm @Recruit That’s interesting. Could it be anything to do with rounding errors on percentage positioning? Could you send the URL? It’s possible that the next version of Chrome will update the WebKit engine so the problem will occur in that too.</blockquote> Here I have a link for you to check: <a href="http://evolvingconsciousness.org/static/" rel="nofollow">http://evolvingconsciousness.org/static/</a> I tried couple techniques to export the design provided by designer, but I get the same 1 pixel jog for bubble from navigation, in Safari and 2 px jog, in firefox for mac. I tried to express background-position in percent, em, event in points but is the same. If you check the link in QtWeb, Safari and Google Chrome you will see the difference.

Craig Buckler Says:
May 4th, 2009 at 4:42 pm

@Recruit
That’s interesting. Could it be anything to do with rounding errors on percentage positioning? Could you send the URL?

It’s possible that the next version of Chrome will update the WebKit engine so the problem will occur in that too.

Here I have a link for you to check:
http://evolvingconsciousness.org/static/

I tried couple techniques to export the design provided by designer, but I get the same 1 pixel jog for bubble from navigation, in Safari and 2 px jog, in firefox for mac. I tried to express background-position in percent, em, event in points but is the same.

If you check the link in QtWeb, Safari and Google Chrome you will see the difference.

]]> By: yogomozilla http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925148 yogomozilla Mon, 04 May 2009 14:18:12 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925148 There are a number of other implementations of Qt/Webkit based browsers available: The venerable Konquerer, which uses KHTML (from which Webkit was forked) as its rendering engine can be run with Webkit, although it (webkitkde) is still in development and has a few bugs. KDE4/Kubuntu users can install the webkitkde package and choose Webkit as the view mode. The Qt based browser <a href="http://code.google.com/p/arora/wiki/KDE4Integration" rel="nofollow">Arora</a> uses Webkit as its rendering engine and has packages available for Mac, Linux and Windows. It's quite fast ;) There is quite a bit more info on the <a href="http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/category/webkit/" rel="nofollow">Qt development blog</a> regarding webkit integration. Now, if only IE would ship an option allowing web developers to enable Webkit as its rendering engine :D Enjoy There are a number of other implementations of Qt/Webkit based browsers available:

The venerable Konquerer, which uses KHTML (from which Webkit was forked) as its rendering engine can be run with Webkit, although it (webkitkde) is still in development and has a few bugs. KDE4/Kubuntu users can install the webkitkde package and choose Webkit as the view mode.

The Qt based browser Arora uses Webkit as its rendering engine and has packages available for Mac, Linux and Windows. It’s quite fast ;)

There is quite a bit more info on the Qt development blog regarding webkit integration.

Now, if only IE would ship an option allowing web developers to enable Webkit as its rendering engine :D

Enjoy

]]> By: mitja http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925142 mitja Mon, 04 May 2009 13:45:19 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925142 @ Tommy Carlier - yes, Chrome does, but oddly Google has not updated the Web Inspector to the latest version from the WebKit trunk even in v2. Hence, it suffers from the same frustrating symptoms as Chrome v.1, ie. doesn't inspect the correct element half the time, doesn't find elements when searching all the time, doesn't dock as part of the main window, and has no usable JavaScript debugger. @ Tommy Carlier – yes, Chrome does, but oddly Google has not updated the Web Inspector to the latest version from the WebKit trunk even in v2. Hence, it suffers from the same frustrating symptoms as Chrome v.1, ie. doesn’t inspect the correct element half the time, doesn’t find elements when searching all the time, doesn’t dock as part of the main window, and has no usable JavaScript debugger.

]]> By: Tarh http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925141 Tarh Mon, 04 May 2009 13:35:40 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925141 <blockquote>It even offers a unique virtual on-screen keyboard so you can enter secure data or passwords without worrying about key loggers.</blockquote>   That's dangerous thinking. The sad truth is that most modern keyloggers go far beyond their namesake; the majority will take a cropped screenshot around any mouse clicks to defeat systems just like this. The bottom line is: once something is allowed to execute unrestricted on your system, there's nothing you can do.

It even offers a unique virtual on-screen keyboard so you can enter secure data or passwords without worrying about key loggers.

 
That’s dangerous thinking. The sad truth is that most modern keyloggers go far beyond their namesake; the majority will take a cropped screenshot around any mouse clicks to defeat systems just like this. The bottom line is: once something is allowed to execute unrestricted on your system, there’s nothing you can do.

]]> By: Craig Buckler http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925129 Craig Buckler Mon, 04 May 2009 06:42:48 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925129 @Recruit That's interesting. Could it be anything to do with rounding errors on percentage positioning? Could you send the URL? It's possible that the next version of Chrome will update the WebKit engine so the problem will occur in that too. @Recruit
That’s interesting. Could it be anything to do with rounding errors on percentage positioning? Could you send the URL?

It’s possible that the next version of Chrome will update the WebKit engine so the problem will occur in that too.

]]> By: Recruit http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925128 Recruit Mon, 04 May 2009 06:25:49 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925128 I have just installed it to check a website of mine. The design of this website, is interpreted differently in Safari, compared with Firefox for win, IE 7+, Opera and Google Chrome, where it looks perfect. It seems that safari and firefox for Mac interprets <code>background-position</code> differently and shifts away 1 px for this particular website. From my first observation, QtWeb reads this website like Safari but a web developer can't rely to test website for google chrome. I have just installed it to check a website of mine. The design of this website, is interpreted differently in Safari, compared with Firefox for win, IE 7+, Opera and Google Chrome, where it looks perfect.

It seems that safari and firefox for Mac interprets background-position differently and shifts away 1 px for this particular website. From my first observation, QtWeb reads this website like Safari but a web developer can’t rely to test website for google chrome.

]]> By: Tommy Carlier http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/04/qtweb-portable-testing-browser/comment-page-1/#comment-925127 Tommy Carlier Mon, 04 May 2009 05:26:41 +0000 http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=8575#comment-925127 I have one correction: Google Chrome does have the Web Inspector. Click the Page-button, go to "Developer" > "JavaScript console". I have one correction: Google Chrome does have the Web Inspector. Click the Page-button, go to “Developer” > “JavaScript console”.

]]>