Talk:Minimo

message: this might be oot. but imho this browser is best suited to run on legacy computers with very low ram (pentium3/64mb) which is still lots of it on third world countries.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.155.92.246 (talk) 20:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  port to i386 

message: I deleted the entire Criticism section:
Probably due to the fact that it is still in the early stages of development, the Windows Mobile version of Minimo performs rather poorly.
The quality of rendered pages is congruent with the well-respected layout engine it implements (Gecko), but the program has very high memory and hardware requirements compared to what is typically available on most handheld platforms (e.g. 64 megabytes of RAM, 206–624 MHz ARM-compatible CPU).
In fact, a recurrent criticism against Firefox and its derived projects regards its supposed bloat, mainly due to its use of XUL and Javascript for describing the user interface and its behaviour.  This choice contributes to the portability of the Mozilla Foundation's products, but incurs a relatively high performance overhead.
Version 0.016 (~8 MB CAB installation; Windows Mobile 4.2 + 5.0) and Version 0.2 (~4 MB CAB installation; Windows Mobile 5.0 only) are not recommendable for end-users not used to running "bleeding edge" software. In this version the browser may make the Windows Mobile OS unstable and a soft-reset may be required to make the system work again. 
The Version 0.2 is recommended for developers working in Mobile platform and with interest in AJAX and Web Services driven Web application for the mobile space. Minimo renders applications like Gmail and is a great space to build cases and improve the mobile experience.
... because it is POV, has not a single source, and has factual errors. Minimo may perform poorly on mobile devices, but not for the reasons given. Gecko happens to have a relatively small footprint in spite of using Javascript and XUL for GUI. In fact, the use of web technologies for the application interface tends to reduce resource hogging redundancy. Because of this among other things Firefox usually uses less memory than IE, even when features that use lots of memory are enabled. Whoever wrote this section should add sources and clean up the errors before adding it back to the article. --RITZ 02:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted Criticism section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Minimo. 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/20050309193157/http://rebron.org/blogarchives/2005/03/minimozilla_com.html to http://rebron.org/blogarchives/2005/03/minimozilla_com.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050729020724/http://rebron.org/blogarchives/2005/07/mo_minimozilla.html to http://rebron.org/blogarchives/2005/07/mo_minimozilla.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100109113437/http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/chofmann/archives/2006/06/ajax_mobile_map.html to http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/chofmann/archives/2006/06/ajax_mobile_map.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified