Thread: Jolla at Slush 2014
View Single Post
juiceme is offline juiceme
2014-12-01 , 20:02
Community Council | Posts: 4,920 | Thanked: 12,867 times | Joined on May 2012 @ Southerrn Finland
#748
Originally Posted by aegis View Post
Personally I've got very few complaints about the browser, especially after the last update which fixed the link offset issue and improved rendering speed immensely. Cut&Paste outside of text areas is about the only complaint and that's coming.
I like the browser too, it is pretty fast on SBJ.

[nitpick]
However, the "link offset issue" sure has not been fixed yet in 1.1.0.39 Uitukka, it still needs the small-pan-after-zoom or you're sure to hit a random link instead of the one you're aiming for.

OTOH, copy&paste outside textboxex works perfectly with the @coderus patch, no problem there.
[/nitpick]


Originally Posted by aegis View Post
So given the choice of a browser that already works well or SDxc cards that aren't supported well, I'll take the latter rather than having to reformat to FAT32 with it's limitations.
Agreed there, no need to invest in the browser development more than is done currently. Besides, it is open source so you're welcome to twiddle with it yourself...

However again, why are you mixing in FAT32 again?? I have no desire whatsoever to use either FAT32 or exFAT on my devices since ext2/ext4 work so well. Also btrfs if you are willing to hand out the FS overhead, otherwice it is the optimal choice of course.
Those give you maximum filesize of 2TB or 16TB which ought to be enough for most of your needs??

And hey, remember, I'm the guy who added exFAT support to N9 kernel so when I am talking about this I know what I'm about here.


Originally Posted by aegis View Post
Really? why? It's not costing them anything extra and they were happy to pay H.264 licencing, JPEG, MPEG and who knows what licencing already. I can't imagine even the most ardent of open source advocate NOT buying something because it supports ExFAT.
I would not be as strict as not buying it because of a FS support I don't need but I am not going to say there aren't people around who would. It takes all kinds, you see.


Originally Posted by aegis View Post
Am I repeating myself? The standard says ExFAT, therefore it's 100% absolutely necessary if you want to claim SDxc card support.
Important for markedroids, sure.