Talk:Camino (web browser)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Apple Inc. Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mozilla (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mozilla, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.MozillaWikipedia:WikiProject MozillaTemplate:WikiProject MozillaMozilla articles

Block Web advertising vs. Adblock

Can someone explain how Camino's "Block Web Advertising" feature works? Is it like adblock? I notice that some banner ads that normally show up on banner heavy webpages don't show up anymore, but the algorithm to block the ads seems arbitrary. Is it like mozilla's adblock, only without a customizable set of regular expressions? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) June 29, 2005 04:31 (UTC)

Basically, yeah. Adblock with less UI. Still customisable, though -- see the various CSS files ~/Library/Application Support/Camino/chrome/ . The new feature is really just a bit of front-end UI and a default blocklist for a feature that's been present for a long time.—chris.lawson (talk) 29 June 2005 04:49 (UTC)

Why Camino?

Someone should explain and maybe go into a little depth about how this software differs from Firefox for Mac and why some might see those differences as adventagous. When I stumbled on this page, the first thought that popped into my head was "Firefox works great on Macs, why does Mozilla need to put out something different like this?..."

Camino is a true Mac program, based around Apple's native Cocoa APIs. Firefox is a cross-platform app based around XUL. As a result, Camino feels more like a "native" application than a Windows/Linux port. It integrates better with the system, such as using the Keychain vs. Mozilla's own password storage system, and it, well, looks prettier. There's good info on the MozillaZine forum thread Camino FAQ. perardi 01:59, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We need to incorporate this info into the article. --Lethargy 01:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a section for this. Needs more but it's a start.Matt J ^User|Talk 13:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Version histories

I've trimmed the version history sections drastically. I don't think we need to copy the release notes here (which is what it was turning into). If someone feels otherwise, the old sections can be restored from the archived page history.--chris.lawson 02:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Camino Naming Origin

Where did the name Camino come from? —This unsigned comment was added by Gordeonbleu (talk • contribs) .

I don't know why they chose it, but it's Spanish for "road" or "way". See wiktionary:camino. – Andyluciano 03:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the official Camino FAQ on the subject; the name was proposed by Simon Fraser (see here, at the end of the Netscape section) during the Chimera must be renamed situation. —69.255.141.9 14:29, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And, AIUI, the Chimera name came from the fact it was the Gecko engine embedded in a Cocoa UI. "Chimera" can refer to a monster made up of parts of other animals. And, one of the original goals of the project was a return to the pre-3.0 days of a web browser-only Netscape Navigator so that's where the original original Navigator name came from. Again, AIUI. I have a copy of Camino 0.1 or 0.2 which is called Navigator in the UI. The interface is rudimentary, to say the least. It looks like an IB mock-up.

Fastest browser?

Camino is the slowest browser I've ever used. I use it as my only browser and advocate it but it is without a doubt the slowest browser I've used on my PowerBook. I strongely believe that "Camino has been lauded by many critics as the fastest internet browser ever.[citation needed]" should most definitely be removed. I activily advocate Camino, but I don't pretend it's something that it's not.--Tilmitt 13:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leading off with

Jon Hicks: "First of all it’s fast – easily the fastest browser I have on my Macs. It feels responsive and nimble."
Rob Griffiths of MacWorld/macosxhints.com: "This is great news, as Camino has long been one of the fastest, best looking browsers available for OS X."
MacOrchard: "What's the point? Speed - blazing speed. Camino is generally as fast as any Windows browser at loading individual pages - and that's a real treat."
An older ArsTechnica review where the 'mythical perfect browser' would have "Camino's speed"
You also get all sorts of "random people": [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] ("Camino is fast, quick, and secure. [...] Mac users will enjoy Camino’s quick speeds and impressive startup times, two things that Firefox just can’t compare with.")

Of course it's all subjective, and "fastest internet browser ever" is probably over the top, and some of the speed praise dates from the pre-Safari days when Chimera was the shining light of the Mac browser world, but the collection of recent articles/reviews shows that recent versions of Camino (0.9a and 1.0) still have the speed "buzz". Keeping the sentence but replacing "fastest internet browser ever" with "fastest web browser on the Mac" does seem reasonable, however.

Camino is not the fastest. Both OmniWeb and Safari outperform it[6]. That said, it is faster than Firefox.Matt J ^User|Talk 13:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was the best browser for Mac & it is a shame they could not continue it because of technical changes in Firefox/Gecko. Nantucketnoon (talk) 02:45, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Is Camino actually based on the Mozilla Application Suite, or does it just use the Gecko layout engine?

Is it really an Internet Gopher client (whatever that is), and if so, do we need to mention it in the opening paragraph? Are other Mozilla applications gopher clients as well?

Lastly, Mike Pinkerton is the technical lead, but if I wanted to state who develops the browser, what should I put? Is it community-driven or is it managed by the Mozilla Foundation?

--Lethargy 01:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In order:

Camino is an embedded Gecko application. For more information about embedding Gecko read this.

See Gopher protocol for more on that, but no, we probably don't need it in the lead. AFAICR, all the other MoFo/Co browsers support the gopher: protocol too, as did Netscape (and, IIRC, IE, at least older versions).

Community-driven, mostly; we get very little official help from MoFo. (At least that's my understanding. I just code and help out with QA and triage; I'm not really involved in MoFo interaction at all.) And by "community" I mean "the 15 or so people who are actually actively working on it."--chris.lawson 04:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Camino uses the older XPFE embedding toolkit to emebed Gecko rather than the newer XULRunner embedding toolkit, which may be the source of the confusion over "based on the based on the Mozilla Application Suite".

The Camino® web browser is developed and released by the Camino Project, a community organization. The Mozilla Foundation (being an actual legal entity) owns the trademark and licenses it to the Camino Project for use with the browser. See the official Camino 1.0 Press Release (original here is no longer accessible, but the content was pasted verbatim into this random forum post) and Mozilla Foundation Executive Director Frank Hecker's blog post here, as well as the Mozilla Trademark Policy.

Future

I have created a section for talking about future features of Camino. Matt J ^User|Talk 13:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Future section mentions features that are not listed on the pages cited for them. —66.32.250.91 22:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

I have converted inline links to references. I hope this is OK. As I included several references in the content I added, I thought it was best to do it this way. Matt J ^User|Talk 13:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Searching Wikipedia from Camino

To search Wikipedia from the Camino toolbar search, find SearchURLList.plist (normally ~/Library/Application Support/Camino/SearchURLList.plist) and add:

        <key>Wikipedia</key>
        <string>http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Search?search=%s&go=Go</string>

in the "dict" list. To make it the default search, remove:

        <key>PreferredSearchEngine</key>
        <string>Google</string>

And replace it with:

        <key>PreferredSearchEngine</key>
        <string>Wikipedia</string>

Note that versions of Camino since 1.6 no longer support this syntax and, in fact, auto-discover the OpenSearch description offered by Wikipedia. 66.32.241.134 (talk) 04:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Text rendering

This is in response to Clawson's removal of the link to the text rendering comparison. If you read the citation, it is quite obvious that Camino and Safari have superior text rendering to Opera and Firefox. I am not an expert on the subject, so I don't know why this is, but I think that while Camino and Firefox share Gecko to render webpages, the way the text is handled once Gecko has rendered it is different. I'd be grateful for a reply, if that is not received soon, I'll add the text back in. Matt J ^User|Talk 10:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the reference (which I would question as a reliable source, too, since we don't normally accept blogs as reliable sources):

Note that the current release of Camino renders the same as Firefox.

That's pretty much all the reason anyone should need not to use this ref in support of (or against) either browser rendering better than another.--chris.lawson 01:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Services

although it does not use native text boxes, which makes Mac OS X services useless.

This phrase is terribly misleading and almost wholly false, and certainly doesn't belong in the lead-in.

Camino does not use native text fields in the content area, true (chrome text fields are native NSText*); however, that does not mean that text fields in web pages do not support Mac OS X services. Select some text in this text field and see for yourself that Services are enabled—assuming you are running a version of Camino built since August 2004[7] :P

(Also note that the next version of Safari will not use native text fields in its content area, either, for the same reasons Camino never has—performance and web page compatibility.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.32.250.91 (talk) 22:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Search Engine

I Figured out how to put in other search engines (i put in some of my own), but i cannot figure out how to put wikipedia in there i did what i thought was right but when i went back to Camino all of my search engines were gone except for google and google images can someone show me a wikipedia line of script that worked for them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.35.166 (talk) 00:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Bias?

This article seems a bit biased towards positive commentary, in my view. I came to it with no preconceived ideas but took the glowing praise with suspicion. A little digging around on the web vindicates this [8]. The linked article shows that Camino isn't faster than Firefox in intel macs, and also that Safari/Webkit are a lot faster, a significant fact not mentioned in the article. --Russell E 11:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The Comparison to Firefox section only mentions advantages over Firefox. Can Camino run Firefox-compatible extensions, for example? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CrisDias (talk • contribs) 14:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no, which many would consider an advantage

Fair use rationale for Image:Camino icon.png

Image:Camino icon.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Camino icon.png

Image:Camino icon.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Camino icon.png

Image:Camino icon.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Native text boxes

The article says camino doesn't use cocoa text boxes. I don't think this is true, certainly not in the latest version. I would remove the line but I'm not completely sure. Anyone know about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.133.252 (talk) 02:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i believe it used to use native text fields but it was changed to improve scrolling speed

big or small, could the main article be made a little bit more accurate?

If Camino has evolved from Chimera - a small, lightweight webbrowser - is there any way it could be described in terms of its size, say, in bytes? Just how big of a browser is Camino, anyway? Is it just a few megs in size? Or is it perhaps much smaller? 198.177.27.17 (talk) 07:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Camino has a comparable size to Firefox (Camino = 42 MB, Firefox = 45 MB). So no, Camino is not really a lightweight browser. Anonymous101 (talk) 07:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that "lightweight" is supposed to refer to file size, necessarily. I would think (though I haven't really used Firefox in some time) that they're referring to lighter memory usage, fewer extensions, etc. Casey J. Morris (talk) 04:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article

Seems to be focused on events and people to about 2005, that is now a few years ago and there are further developments that do not seem to be covered Satu Suro 14:39, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Number 5 7 19:30, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Camino → Camino (web browser)
Camino (disambiguation) → Camino

– I think this article isn't more important than other articles. Vivaelcelta {talk · contributions} 18:24, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - agreed. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for two reasons:
1. Items listed in "Camino (disambiguation)" are mostly partial title matches, e.g. "Camino, California"; there are only two – "Camino (film)" (view stats) and "Camino (band)" (view stats) – with a full title match and "Camino" (the web browser) (view stats) is obviously the primary topic among them as it is sought 6 times more than the film and 36 times more than the band. (The only other recurrently visited title is "Camino de Santiago" with 26,384 visits this month, which is quite staggering; too bad it is a partial title match.)
2. Per disambiguation pages must have "(disambiguation)" at the end.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 00:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Codename Lisa, sorry but where does WP:Disambiguation say disambiguation pages must have "(disambiguation)" at the end? It might be a good proposal but I've never seen that even suggested. BTW towns called Camino are not normally what we'd call "partial matches", in terms of the guideline Camino, Piedmont and Camino, Veneto are both full matches. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with In ictu oculi. --Vivaelcelta {talk · contributions} 07:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, In ictu oculi. Sorry for the delay; I've been away. Your answer is in WP:DABNAME: It says ‘If there is a primary topic, then the tag "(disambiguation)" is added to the name of the disambiguation page.’ Of course, it goes without saying that my reason #1 and reason #2 are cause and effect. In other words, when I oppose with the first move, I naturally oppose with the second. Only I wasn't sure if everyone knows this. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 09:35, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. But as 70.51.46.146 evidently there are several complete title matches - the Camino towns. Camino de Santiago, the pilgrimage route in France and Spain while itself a partial title match is also generator of several complete title matches for books and albums. The browser is not more notable than all other Camino combined. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The browser does not seem to be the primary topic here.--Yaksar (let's chat) 06:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support CodenameLisa is mistaken. "Camino, X" the places are not PTM, the format used on Wikipedia are disambiguated forms, the names for the places are just "Camino". Birmingham, Alabama does not mean that "Birmingham, AL" isn't called "Birmingham" unless the article is called Birmingham. Or Boston, Lincolnshire isnt' called "Boston" unless the article is called Boston. Similarly for all other placenames. Municipalities use commas for disambiguation instead of parentheses -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 08:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are referring to WP:PTM which says some partial title matches are not allowed in dab pages. But yes, if the title isn't exactly Camino, it is a partial title match. That is the problem with an acronym: It is not always the same a its expanded form. For example: A Mac computer is not a PC, although it is a personal computer; even though PC comes from Personal Computer. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 09:35, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you treat it that way, the all articles not at base names are ptm, including all articles using parenthetical disambiguation. -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 06:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. No clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. BTW, this is the first time I hear about that web browser. Asturkian (talk) 20:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Camino (web browser). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20010405072223/http://www.chimera.org/ to http://www.chimera.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:43, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]