1. 14
  1.  

  2. 52
    • Me: Oh boy, a small browser!
    • “Small Browser”: ‘Ōryōki is built with Electron on top of Chromium.’
    • Me: Nope. close tab
    1. 16
      -Ōryōki [応量器] is a small, thin container for the web.
      +Ōryōki [応量器] is an experimental web browser with a thin interface.
      

      – 10 hours ago, via GitHub ?

      1. 4

        The funniest/saddest part is that they bring this huge, advanced cross-platform component and the download is OSX only!

        I’ll spend the rest of my days with the Handmade Network guys (https://hero.handmade.network/), they are onto something…

        1. 2

          Imagine what a large browser built atop this illustrious stack would look like!

          1. 9

            Vivaldi, basically.

        2. 9

          For another (experimental) “browser” built on Electron, see Mozilla’s Project Tofino. (there’s a screenshot here)

          1. 8

            So you’re using Electron to make an app with web technology… but you don’t make it cross-platform. Huh.

            Nice job with the minimal chrome though.

            1. 8

              How the hell do people make programs that are for one platform in Electron. Like, that’s literally one of the biggest benefits of Electron.

              1. 3

                Tell me about it. It’s like commercial Java applications I’ve seen that use ActiveX controls (no, really - I have seen them). Horrendous :(

                1. 2

                  Oh jesus.

              2. 7

                Man, I remember when writing a browser used to mean something </swirls whiskey>.

                I’m getting a little tired of “We made a new browser! Using Chromium!”.

                That’s like saying “We made a new operating system! Using Ubuntu!”, or “We made a new cake! Using another cake!”.

                1. 10

                  Hard to see why such a simple website requires Javascript to be viewed (how it looks without).

                  But hey, “light browser that requires electron”, how fitting that it’s presented in a “light website that asynchronously downloads its content in markdown and parses it clientside°

                  1. 5

                    Because heavens, we can’t just write HTML. I’m confused why they chose this route, it seems like more effort than it’s worth.

                    1. 4

                      It’s not actually parsing full fledged markdown, it’s just doing inline monospace parts (<code>/backticks) and one level of heading… which means they actually WROTE a mini markdown parser instead of taking a random library on the net.

                      And yet they thought this was better than directly write <h2> and <code> blocks. This is so puzzling.

                      1. 1

                        I mean, there’s static site generators that parse Markdown and turn it into HTML in templates for you. IIRC, they even have git hooks to simplify the workflow.

                        This is laziness that’s too much work.

                  2. 5

                    Checkout Tabby browser - “Minimal Chromium based browser with almost no UI, relies on keyboard shortcuts.”

                    1. 4

                      In my opinion this general idea is what Surf (by suckless) should have been.

                      Well, I hope the implementation is good enough.

                      1. 1

                        Surf should have been built on top of chrome?

                        1. 6

                          Surf could have had these features by default.

                          I’m not talking about the implementation, but rather, the concept.

                      2. 3

                        Do they know you can have an even more minimal version of chrome by pressing F11?