Interview:
What was your motivation for creating Lunascape?
I could tell from early on that browsers are the center of the computing universe. But there’s a lot of room for improvement. Back in August 2001 the big problem with browsers was keeping multiple windows open at once. Screens were small, having 20 windows open at once was annoying. So I built the initial Lunascape browser with tabs, the world’s first, actually, and got so excited by the potential for improving browsers, I never looked back. I worked at Sony doing research on advanced browser technologies, I went back to school for a while, too, in the same area.
Eventually, I knew I wanted to create a company for the express purpose of improving browser technology. So I founded Lunascape in 2004.
It’s not, though, just a business. I see browsers as the key to bridging the Digital Domain. The more accessible, the more easy to use, the more the Internet becomes possible for people everywhere. We have users around the world, including places like Bhutan and Gambia. It’s incredible. That’s something worth being involved in.
What are the license restrictions? Is it OpenSource or Proprietary?
Lunascape is proprietary software, but is free to download and use.
Will a free version of the browser be always available?
Yes, absolutely.
How to write plugins for this browser? What language do you use for writing plugins?
We use Jscript, VBScript and C++ — anything that utilized COM — plus HTML and CSS.
How are flash plugin, java plugin, video player plugin etc are managed? How to install them?
This is a major priority for us because we believe the “vendor lock-in” part of browser use occurs with plugins. Users spend a lot of time customizing their browsers. Losing that when they want to try another browser or switch completely is just too painful. In Lunascape, for Trident, it’s the same as regular browsers, just a one-click process. For Gecko and Webkit, we bundle the various plugins and are planning to be able to install them with the same easy one-click process in the future.
What are the options available for javascript engines? Do you support SpiderMonkey, SquirrelFish or V8?
We support all of the various Javascript engines that Trident, Gecko, and Webkit support. In the case of TraceMonkey running on Gecko, we do our own specialized tuning, and it actually runs faster than on Firefox.
If I switch from gecko to webkit for web rendering can I still use tracemonkey as my javascript engine?
No.
Do you have any plans for developing this browser for other operating systems?
Yes, we’re actively planning versions for both Linux and Mac. We’ve had many requests for both.
When do you plan to release the final version of Lunascape5?
We won’t disclose that too much ahead of time, but it’s not far off! Our blog and twitter are great places to get the latest information from us. We’re always talking with users there and giving out information and schedules as soon as we know them.
What is the future plan going forward?
Users are looking for effective, fast, easy web surfing. They want to use web applications — like gmail, Facebook, Twitter and many, many more — and not get stuck down in the weeds with issues like trying to figure out which web browser is best. It shouldn’t be like that. Answering those needs, that’s what we’re after.
We’re ambitious. Something close to 5 billion people still are not using the Internet at all. Using a browser will be, more than likely, the first and best way for new users of the Internet to take advantage of cyberspace. Imagine all that human potential. The browser is a key tool in that equation. Facilitating ways to support new Internet users, people who have never been online, that’s a major goal of ours.
How many engines does Konqueror support?
KHTML only at this time.
There’s been hints floating around the web that they may make a KPart out of WebKit such that you could switch between KHTML and WebKit, but I have no idea if that is actually happening.
I don’t know the specifics behind it, but on jaunty at least the kpart is in the repository and seems functional from the couple test runs I gave it. It was a little slow, but that’s not too surprising at this point. It did really drive home that konq really needs some love as a web browser. In particular, it’s heading to be the only browser that doesn’t have some kind of JIT compilation for javascript.
It also has an experimental webkit engine.
Actually there is a webkit kpart, which can be used in konqueror: http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/playground/libs/webkitkde/
I tried it with KDE trunk and it seams to work reasonably well.
There are also several projects to build a stand-alone browser for KDE, just like dolphin: Foxkit (http://code.google.com/p/foxkit/), Arora (http://code.google.com/p/arora/) and rekonq (http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php/rekonq+Web+Browser?content…).
I remember way back in the day there used to be a gecko kpart. I think it hasn’t been functional in a long time though.
Wasn’t Netscape 8 the first browser with a switchable engine? However, this is the first to let you switch between all three leading rendering engines.
Yes, I remember, too. AOL offered two engine browser.
WTF? Isnt this supposed to be Safari not Chrome. I know Safari uses webkit and I know apple introduced webkit aftering merging khtml. Whats with Google taking over this lovely core?
might be that the chrome source are more usable as a component that safari (hackable, whatever )
If I use Lunascape with Trident selected, will I be more secure than if I use IE? (I don’t know where security flaws are located in IE). Thanks.
I would assume it has the same security vulnerabilities as IE does. However, assuming this is the same version of Trident that ships with IE7, is security in IE7 really that big of an issue anymore, at least as compared to everyone else?
I mean, I know it was a nightmare with IE6, but I thought IE7 was pretty well ‘sandboxed’, and blocking ActiveX controls by default, etc.
Edited 2009-02-12 19:01 UTC
I believe you’re right. However, on post-XP systems (Vista and Windows 7), you’d actually be *more* secure with IE most likely, since it’s been designed to run in “protected mode” on those platforms. Unless they’ve made it in such a way that anything using IE’s Trident engine is automatically run in protected mode, but I haven’t heard anything about that. I guess that’s where the ability to disable ActiveX in this new browser comes in handy, that alone will seriously defend against a lot of bad stuff out there.
Still, nothing beats common sense; just don’t visit sites you don’t trust and click every random link you see, and you’ll be much safer.
Edited 2009-02-13 04:48 UTC
Protected mode is basically a hack to allow IE to run with reduced privileges. Microsoft didn’t take the time to write a proper solution to allow any application to run inside a low-rights sandbox – it was designed to allow a single application to run inside a single low-rights sandbox, and it has lots of hacks to allow older IE addons to still work, such as file and registry virtualization.
Basically, unless you’re IE, protected mode is kind of useless, and Microsoft don’t support using it in any way. The sole component of protected mode that’s usable by third-party applications is the integrity levels feature, which prevents a low integrity application from screwing around with a higher integrity application. It does absolutely nothing to protect files or the registry.
Chrome takes an interesting approach – they build their own sandbox. It’s not the same as IE’s protected mode, and doesn’t rely on the integrity levels feature introduced in Vista, or UAC, so it works on Windows XP as well.
Basically, each rendering task (one per tab, I think) is run inside it’s own process. The security token for each process is modified so that the process is denied access to everything. Each process is run inside a virtual desktop to isolate it from the user’s desktop. This gives the same effect as protected mode – the vulnerable parts of the application are isolated from the rest of the system, so any successful attack can only damage the contents of the sandbox. Which is empty, so there’s nothing to damage.
…ummmm..neither does Microsoft.
garyd is correct. Netscape 8 could switch between IE’s Trident and Mozilla’s Gecko engine. It was actually not a bad browser as I recall. Netscape 9 did away with the dual support and went back to Gecko exclusively. Not sure why, but it was a pretty good performing browser.
Jeff
Everyone knows Netscape 8 could do exactly that long before this newfangled browser.
How big is this beast and how much of a pain is it to get updated? I don’t run into websites that need activex/IE anymore so why would anyone want to use IE? People will choose a Webkit variant or a Gecko variant and stick with it.
I also don’t see how they can be faster at JS than anyone else, if anything they will be the exact same as the other other browsers since there is no actual code being added/modified other than their shell/glue code.
Edited 2009-02-12 21:09 UTC
This is what I thought too. Don’t the rendering engines also include CSS and JS engines?
I guess web designers already use MultipleIE or equivalent to test their web sites.
Regular users probably want to avoid Trident. I use Presto.
The reason the JS execution is faster is explained in the interview.
“In the case of TraceMonkey running on Gecko, we do our own specialized tuning, and it actually runs faster than on Firefox.”
We can only hope that they as good netizen have contributed back these optimizations to firefox considering how much firefox has given them.
haha,
Shorter Beer means Fosters Lager.
Not only that, but it is also the fastest browser in the world. To accomplish that, it renders each page with all the three engines at once and uses the fastest result.
(Sorry, couldn’t resist – there are too much superlatives in this news and trying to ex post facto make fast something which was designed not to be – HTML/CSS/Javascript – makes me cry as an engineer.)
That would at least finally give someone a reason to buy this “interesting” AMD 3 core processor which has been floating around for some time now.
Strange similarity with the Dreamhost logo
http://www.dreamhost.com/
This reminds me of the late 90s and early 2000s when there was a lot of various trident-based (and some that was hybrid Trident/Gecko) browser with branding. (Yahoo-browser, MSN-browser, AOL-browser, etc…)
Seems like this is a new trend, in Mac there is an explosion of various WebKit browsers and in windows you have things such as Sleipnir, which also is Japanese.
http://www.fenrir-inc.com/
I don’t really see the point of all these though, they rarely add more value than the browsers that “own” the rendering engines they are using.
“Back in August 2001 the big problem with browsers was keeping multiple windows open at once. Screens were small, having 20 windows open at once was annoying. So I built the initial Lunascape browser with tabs, the world’s first”
Opera 5 had tabs in 2000.
(Can’t remember whether Mozilla had it before 2001 or not.)
“Something close to 5 billion people still are not using the Internet at all. Using a browser will be, more than likely, the first and best way for new users of the Internet to take advantage of cyberspace.”
Chances are that they’ll access that with a mobile browser(not necesseraliy on a smartphone) and not a computer. This is why Opera Mobile is actually more used than Safari Mobile despite iPhones huge success.
(I realize that I come off as a Opera-fanboy here, for the record: I’m a Firefox user at desktop, and Safari user with my phone.)
They should revamp the GUI of Lunascape and remove all not-so-important items. I’m not going to leave my Opera any time soon
Why on earth they make custom skins for these applications instead of the default Windows style?
It’s like Apple… they are forcing their look on Windows in Safari, iTunes and Quicktime Player…
Apple are funny.
After Leopard they’re very strict about user interface styles(exept “pro” programs), but completely dump it on Windows.
I can understand why though. Their interface is a brand, and they’re using their Windows programs to advertise for OS X. I don’t think it’s working out that well though. All their interfaces on Windows is usually not very stable and behaves weird.
I guess part reason they get away with it is that nobody(including Microsft themselves) seem to care all that much about GUI consistency on Windows. Just look at Office 2007. Except Firefox maybe.
all the technical bits aside, that browser is one fugly piece of software :/
Firefox has an “Open in IE Tab” plugin.