On Sat, 09 Apr 2011 13:52:43 -0400, corvid <corvid@lavabit.com> wrote:
Benjamin wrote:
A much more practical solution, as far as I'm concerned, is simply to build that functionality into the browser: - It's simpler, since there's on interprocess communication required. - It's more portable, for the same reason. - It's easier to distribute, since you only need one executable.
I personally like the idea of dillo in one piece. I think a lot of people who give it a try don't get dillo + dpid + the dpis talking to each other correctly, and then they don't want to waste their time fighting with a random unfamiliar computer program.
Personally, I'm not opposed to DPI in and of itself. I think it's an interesting extension mechanism, but I'd like it to remain just that -- a way of extending the browser. I don't think it should be used to offload major functionality that any reasonable user would expect to come built in. One other thing that concerns me: a Windows user might start Dillo, see a bunch of unfamiliar DPI programs running, and worry that it's some kind of virus/spyware infection. Even if someone explained that it's just part of the browser, they might not be convinced, since -- say -- Firefox doesn't start all that stuff in the background. Spyware is increasingly a very real and very serious concern, so many users are justifiably suspicious of anything even remotely out of the ordinary. Of course, I know I'm still in the minority here, which is why I just keep hacking away at it and try to let my code speak for itself. :-) ~Benjamin