Yahoo! Releases Own Web Browser Dubbed 'Axis'

[JMcEntegart]

Well, this is interesting.

Yahoo! Releases Own Web Browser Dubbed 'Axis' : Read more

 

[pedro_mann]

I appluad their efforts. Unfortunately, this is about 5 years too late.

 

[frank_drebin]

so is it a search plugin or full-blown browser ???

 

[dark_lord69]

knowing yahoo it's probably got tons of garbage and crap advertisements all over the place.
I always hated the clutter of the Yahoo page and that is why I started using google so many years ago.

Simple, clean page with good results.

 

[tuch92]

Anyone else think that looks a little too much like Adobe's logo?

 

[sliem]

It also looks like ding ding ding lunch is ready!

 

[kaisellgren]

For desktop, it's a search plugin, nothing more. For mobile, I *think* it's a chromium based browser. Someone can confirm this.

 

[lp231]

A flaw just when it's released...
http://vr-zone.com/articles/yahoo-makes-huge-security-error-with-axis-browser/16027.html

 

[greenrider02]

I'm sorry, the first thing wrong with this is the name. When you name something Axis, I think evil.

 

[whiteodian]

[citation][nom]greenrider02[/nom]I'm sorry, the first thing wrong with this is the name. When you name something Axis, I think evil.[/citation] I thought that too. Axis of Evil. Muhahahahahahahaha. Good luck Yahoo!!

 

[neon871]

Here is another law Suite for using the word Axis them CATIA/CAD Cam boyz have a patten on that word.

 

[soundping]

"Axis of Evil" Someone at Yahoo didn't see that?

 

[ta152h]

If Yahoo starts talking about Lebensraum, we're in deep trouble.

 

[nebun]

a little to bloated for me....thanks but no thanks

 

[eddieroolz]

Looks really cool. I'll definitely be taking a look at this.

As for the naysayers, this forum seems to be filled with one. 5 years too late? Really? Thats what they said about Apple back in the late 90's...look at where we are now.

 

[spookyman]

[citation][nom]pedro_mann[/nom]I appluad their efforts. Unfortunately, this is about 5 years too late.[/citation]

Its 10yrs to late.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]spookyman[/nom]Its 10yrs to late.[/citation]

Several popular web browsers today weren't around ten years ago, so that's BS. Firefox is from 2004 and Chrome is only from 2008 and there are others.

 

[zaznet]

[citation][nom]frank_drebin[/nom]so is it a search plugin or full-blown browser ???[/citation]

It's pretty much a plugin. For mobile devices like iOS that don't support browser plugins it just runs on Webkit. Calling it a browser is a stretch.

 

[gsacks]

What is this article about? I stopped reading at Yahoo!

 

[mitch074]

@blazorthon: Firefox is based off the Gecko engine, which powered the Mozilla Suite which came out in version 1.0 Final at the end of 2001 - so, it IS actually more than 10 years old. IE6 came out in 2001 - only IE9 managed to really break away from its engine (IE7 was only a major bug-fix, IE8 still retained the Javascript engine and a bunch of parser glitches). Opera was at version 5 or 6 by then.

In fact, since Webkit is a fork of KDE's KHTML component (the fork occurred in 2002; Konqueror, which used KHTML for HTML rendering, was a quite advanced web browser in its own right), even those can be considered to be decade-old.

However, I shudder at the extra traffic and CPU load generating a preview of a page will entail. And, on rich web pages, this type of components will mess with the event listeners put on the links...

 

[blazorthon]

@blazorthon: Firefox is based off the Gecko engine, which powered the Mozilla Suite which came out in version 1.0 Final at the end of 2001 - so, it IS actually more than 10 years old. IE6 came out in 2001 - only IE9 managed to really break away from its engine (IE7 was only a major bug-fix, IE8 still retained the Javascript engine and a bunch of parser glitches). Opera was at version 5 or 6 by then.

In fact, since Webkit is a fork of KDE's KHTML component (the fork occurred in 2002; Konqueror, which used KHTML for HTML rendering, was a quite advanced web browser in its own right), even those can be considered to be decade-old.

However, I shudder at the extra traffic and CPU load generating a preview of a page will entail. And, on rich web pages, this type of components will mess with the event listeners put on the links...

I didn't say that Opera and IE weren't older because I knew that they were older. That's why I said several browsers are less than ten years old, not all browsers are less than ten years old.
Firefox launched in 2004 and Chrome launched in 2008. What software they were based on does not matter because that is older software that they were based on, not the actual Firefox and Chrome. Windows Vista is something like five years old and Windows 7 and 8 are both based off of the same kernel, does that make both Windows 7 end 8 about five years old? No, it doesn't.

 

[captaincharisma]

sounds like just another annoying toolbar to me

 

[mgraczyk]

No joke. Yahoo!'s new Axis browser is one of the most innovative evolutions in the browser market. It didn't come from Google/Chrome, Microsoft/IE, Mozilla/Firefox, Apple/Safari or Opera. It came from Yahoo!. Yes, Yahoo!. Who woulda thunk? Axis shines particularly in iOS, where the Axis app is WAY better than Safari for iPhones and iPads. It's bookmarking functionality doesn't compare to iCrumz.com but a valiant effort!

 

[sykozis]

[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]@blazorthon: Firefox is based off the Gecko engine, which powered the Mozilla Suite which came out in version 1.0 Final at the end of 2001 - so, it IS actually more than 10 years old. IE6 came out in 2001 - only IE9 managed to really break away from its engine (IE7 was only a major bug-fix, IE8 still retained the Javascript engine and a bunch of parser glitches). Opera was at version 5 or 6 by then.[/citation]

The Gecko engine developement was started by Netscape in 1997. Netscape 6 was the first browser to actually use Gecko....

 

[del35]

The mobile version for iOS is a stand alone application that offers the same visual previews and what search results as you type.

I thought this article was about Yahoo. Then why am I reading the above? Perhaps the article should have been titled in some other way.