hi,

can anyone tell me why the stock browser can't display

www.bbc.co.uk webpage correctly. Ever since they launched their new look site the main page doesn't load properly, the sport section on the right always cuts off and you can only see the first few characters of each headline.

Is there a solution to display it properly, I dont want to use the cut down phone version of the site.

Thanks

The problem is with BBC.

It also happens on other sites, that redirect you to some customised site - e.g. www.bbc.co.uk takes you to www.bbc.com/mobile/i/ - if you use the "macuco" browser on the N900 that emulates the iPhone browser.

Try first with your PC and see where it takes you. The N900 use the same browser as any other laptop running Linux such as Firefox/Iceweasel and Opera. The page that is shown is the same as the laptop and not the one made for the iPhone.

With the N900 you have the choice of two worlds: behave as any other computer, but keep it in the pocket, or mimick the iPhone with its short-comings and constraints. I suggest you make BBC aware of their problem and ask that "ClickIt" studies this site for a technology update.

But it is no problem with the N900.

Actually, on seeing the Opera interpretation of this site, I'm inclined to think it's microB & the CSS. Note: when the page loads slowly (usually b/c of excessive content per page) the page looks ok until microB implements all the layout commands. Therefore, either Opera doesn't implement the layout in its entirity (possible) or microB over- or under- implements the layout. Which I wonder?

My guess: the problem is Partly the BBC. (and partly microB).

If anyone reading this is using Fennec, please advise as to whether the right hand side is trimmed (as per microB). Screenshots of website attached. If Fennec gets it correct, perhaps it's another case to port non-UI elements to microB?

microB UA string:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux armv7l; rv:2.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0.1

Images below
Top: MicroB. Bottom. Opera[/B] (11.5).
I have No idea why these images are different sizes - both Ctrl + Shift + P.

Nope, page shows perfect for me on Fennec 7.01

Also just checked using Default and Desktop Firefox agents, works the same.
Obviously "If-fone" agent takes you to the cut down mobile site.

So looks like we (collectively) need to think of how to port things like the CSS interpreter, the JS engine, etc. to microB. Perhaps a topic for Brainstorm very soon?

One of the developer angels we have here was considering reimplementing the closed source browser ui (as it had few external dependencies on other closed components) so we could update the microb engine. It'll be in the IRC logs form last year if you care to search back for info.

The "Brainstorming" that is needed is in BBC.

Completely bought and paid for by Apple.
So much for "impartial reporting".

I would suggest that sites that want to support mobile phone, does so by making a button that you can use. I have used my phone for browsing since 1996 and that the release one device with a tiny minority marketshare creates so much havoc is insane. We use just standard regular browser on a tiny screen. We concluded in 2000 that 7" was too small for browsing, and made a iPad with a 13" screen and the main comment was "Make it on a larger screen and we will buy it..." - so a 17" device was made. But can BBC know if the screen is 4" or 17" - by every device sends an identification code?

Take to your senses BBC: fit a button for 4" devices, 7" and maybe for 17" and larger..... We can "zoom in" - have done so for 15 years.

Opera has the capability to report in as you choose - as IE, Safari, Firefox etc. I can ask them to amend iPhone.

Opera will render differently, and optimise on showing as much as possible. They can do this because it is so simpe to zoom.

Thanks mr_jrt. I quite like microB's UI. If everything else could be / had to be replaced, it'd be fine. It's the 'moving' parts that need reviewing (e.g. the -moz prefix is required for microB even though it's not proper). I can even put up with the poor text reflow, if that's a part of the UI, not the layout-engine.

I'll see if I can dig it out of the logs. I think the browser engine is OSS but don't know what can be replaced without breaking dependency trees - or really how to go about it. 'browserd' is now OSS, which seemed like a breakthrough when released. Probably good for making web clients more easily?

MicroB is 2008/'9 technology so considering how to update its inner workings might be worthwhile, wouldn't it? Someone correct me if I'm wrong - microB was designed with the intention being able to view the web like one does from a desktop computer, but on the go i.e. the perfect hybrid. Most of the time, it's amazing.

One of the troubles is the that client width (i.e. device width) is just not sufficient to cope with some desktop sites. This does not simply mean zoom - e.g. even on TMO it's evident: the smileys to the right of the message-entry box are obscured by the right hand column. Yet, equivalent mobile sites display poorly because microB is not a typical mobile browser like the N9's Qt/Webkit one (which, AFAIK, is almost the same as the iPhonne's, incidentally). The fact the the BBC site and many others don't display as intended is a combination of
- these sites' over ambitious layout vs. client size,
- these sites treat microB as an obscure mobile browser thus do not even attempt to display their content (try opening iplayer site without changing UA string),
- xul-1.9 layout engine being increasingly long in the tooth for the newest mobile and desktop sites so will have increasing number of layout problems.

The BBC and other lazy web developers use the UA string to detect what device you're browsing from. I suggest playing them at their own game by using the programme "Hide User Agent"; the only caveat is some sites demand a valid UA string so you'll need to use something like the one I posted above. I believe most N900 users want a near desktop browsing experience on the device, so microB is the best option. The best of both worlds would be to allow users to run the browser in either mobile mode or desktop mode - perhaps something to consider adding in?