Recommended Posts

Before you start flaming members, click on the link in my signature. They will never catch up with Chrome, I never said they would.. Mozilla does not have the funding that Google does. The point I was trying to make is that Mozilla could still release updates or revisions every 6 weeks, but they really do not need three channels to do it. One cannot file a bug report on a procedural issue. I just do not ever move up with the channel. I stay with the Nightly builds as my extensions will continue to work and not be borked for a couple of days while ACR is updated. Yes Heartripper this is an old issue.

So first you claim that Mozilla is artifically inflating Firefox's version numbers to keep up with Chrome, and then you turn around that Mozilla doesn't have the funding that Google does. Why would Mozilla need funding to keep up with Chrome's version numbers? How poor do you need to be before you're unable to afford to artificially bump version numbers? Your claims are all contradicting each other. They don't even come together to form a cohesive story, much less any facts.

Mozilla needs multiple release channels because no sane software vendor writes fresh patches for a product as complex as Firefox and deploys it to the masses six weeks later. Six weeks is simply nowhere near enough time for QA and for add-on authors to test and react to new changes. Do you honestly believe that everyone should be running the Aurora channel?

So first you claim that Mozilla is artifically inflating Firefox's version numbers to keep up with Chrome, and then you turn around that Mozilla doesn't have the funding that Google does. Why would Mozilla need funding to keep up with Chrome's version numbers? How poor do you need to be before you're unable to afford to artificially bump version numbers? Your claims are all contradicting each other. They don't even come together to form a cohesive story, much less any facts.

Mozilla needs multiple release channels because no sane software vendor writes fresh patches for a product as complex as Firefox and deploys it to the masses six weeks later. Six weeks is simply nowhere near enough time for QA and for add-on authors to test and react to new changes. Do you honestly believe that everyone should be running the Aurora channel?

Firefox is not all that complex of a program. Google is trying to take control of the entire internet. They have billions at their disposal, Chrome is not an open source product such as Firefox. Chrome started with the numbers game and not Firefox. Mozilla just tried to keep up , knowing that they cannot catchup with the numbers game. Also Firefox is very close to dropping behind Chrome. Maybe Firefox should have ran a TV ad during the World Series as Chrome did.

The addons I am using now with the exception of about 3 are identical to the ones I used with Firefox 3.0. In your opinion then software companies such as Adobe, MS, are all insane as they only have one channel. For Adobe right now it is Photoshop CS6. No I do not believe everyone should be on the Aurora channel. I never said that. The Aurora channel should not exist. The progression should be from Nightly to Beta to Final.

Firefox is not all that complex of a program.

A program that has more than 60 megabytes' worth of source code and almost a hundred developers working full-time on it is "not all that complex"?? Wow, which university did you graduate from and what are your qualifications that something like Firefox "isn't all that complex" to you?

Chrome is not an open source product such as Firefox.

You've never heard of the Chromium project, have you?

Chrome started with the numbers game and not Firefox. Mozilla just tried to keep up , knowing that they cannot catchup with the numbers game.

And why the hell not? If Mozilla's motive was really to catch up with Chrome in the numbers game they could release once every three weeks and pass Chrome in a matter of months. Hell, they could release once every week if they wanted to. What's stopping them? How on earth would Mozilla's lack of "billions" prevent them from releasing Firefox quicker than Chrome if they really wanted to catch up? Are you even trying to make any sense?

The addons I am using now with the exception of about 3 are identical to the ones I used with Firefox 3.0. In your opinion then software companies such as Adobe, MS, are all insane as they only have one channel.

*facepalm* For ****'s sake, it's because Adobe and Microsoft's products ARE NOT ON RAPID RELEASE SCHEMES!

For Adobe right now it is Photoshop CS6. No I do not believe everyone should be on the Aurora channel. I never said that. The Aurora channel should not exist. The progression should be from Nightly to Beta to Final.

And how does that change anything? That's still three release channels, which is exactly what you were whining about earlier.

I don't mean to flame you, but your ignorance is unbelievably astounding. Please go and at least make some semblance of an effort to educate yourself before claiming you "know damn well" about anything.

A program that has more than 60 megabytes' worth of source code and almost a hundred developers working full-time on it is "not all that complex"?? Wow, which university did you graduate from and what are your qualifications that something like Firefox "isn't all that complex" to you?

You've never heard of the Chromium project, have you?

And why the hell not? If Mozilla's motive was really to catch up with Chrome in the numbers game they could release once every three weeks and pass Chrome in a matter of months. Hell, they could release once every week if they wanted to. What's stopping them? How on earth would Mozilla's lack of "billions" prevent them from releasing Firefox quicker than Chrome if they really wanted to catch up? Are you even trying to make any sense?

*facepalm* For ****'s sake, it's because Adobe and Microsoft's products ARE NOT ON RAPID RELEASE SCHEMES!

And how does that change anything? That's still three release channels, which is exactly what you were whining about earlier.

I don't mean to flame you, but your ignorance is unbelievably astounding. Please go and at least make some semblance of an effort to educate yourself before claiming you "know damn well" about anything.

I would do as you said. Educate yourself and learn some manners. Chromium is NOT Chrome.Going from Nightly to Beta to Final is not three release channels. The channel would progress from Nightly to Firefox Beta and Firefox Final. You see once a Mozilla product becomes Beta, it is branded as Firefox. The Aurora channel is a waste. Why would anyone want to use a channel that is in between Alpha and Beta which is what Aurora is. Now unless you can conduct yourself in a civil manner, I am done responding to any of your posts.

I would do as you said. Educate yourself and learn some manners. Chromium is NOT Chrome.Going from Nightly to Beta to Final is not three release channels. The channel would progress from Nightly to Firefox Beta and Firefox Final. You see once a Mozilla product becomes Beta, it is branded as Firefox. The Aurora channel is a waste. Why would anyone want to use a channel that is in between Alpha and Beta which is what Aurora is. Now unless you can conduct yourself in a civil manner, I am done responding to any of your posts.

1. Chromium is Chrome for all intents and purposes. Google takes Chromium snapshots and slaps proprietary codecs, Flash/PDF plugins, an updater, and a different logo on them, and you get Chrome. The underlying browser is completely identical. If you wanted Chrome's source code, you dig around the Chromium repositories and get it.

2. Just because Beta is branded as Firefox doesn't mean it's the same channel as Release. If they were the same channel, they'd be, oh I don't know, be the same channel instead of being called Beta and Release and have different version numbers? I'm not sure why I'm reduced to explaining something this obvious, but oh well...

3. Maybe if you stop trying to act like you "know damn well" about anything at all while spewing all sorts of ignorant nonsense and yet insisting they're facts, you might get respected. Yes, I know probably it's a strange concept for you, but that's how it works.

You can read can't you. Read what I posted. If you do not agree I do not care. This is a forum and being such debates will happen. C-Ya

I go away for a few hours and there's two pages of useless comments. If you are looking for a debate, use the search function on the forum. This numbering issue has already been debated on at least a dozen threads, going on and on with useless drivel like this for pages.

So bottom line is this. Regardless of what you think about Mozilla's intentions are about version numbers, keep this thread kosher for discussing new features, bug reports, and user issues related to the use of Firefox.

really Grinder, go away, you've lost this pointless argument

now can we please get a mod in here to clean this thread back up

You go away .Listen, I tried to end this long time ago. I stated my opinion and it was not agreed to. So what. I said to move on but no one seems to want to. This is a Forum and this section is about Firefox. Deal with it.

You go away .Listen, I tried to end this long time ago. I stated my opinion and it was not agreed to. So what. I said to move on but no one seems to want to. This is a Forum and this section is about Firefox. Deal with it.

yes this is about firefox, so when i come here and see new replies i want to hear new things about what's landing on firefox, not some petty argument, which whether you want to see it or not you were causing just by trying to claim your opinions as hard facts

yes this is about firefox, so when i come here and see new replies i want to hear new things about what's landing on firefox, not some petty argument, which whether you want to see it or not you were causing just by trying to claim your opinions as hard facts

I want to see the same things as you do. That being said the OP is Firefox Next. I see nothing wrong with bringing up an Idea. I did not start this and I am sorry I ever brought it up. The proper person has been notified.

I want to see the same things as you do. That being said the OP is Firefox Next. I see nothing wrong with bringing up an Idea. I did not start this and I am sorry I ever brought it up. The proper person has been notified.

don't be sorry for stating your opinions, just be a little careful with your wording as things can easily be taken the wrong way on the internet

I too should apologize to you as I think I was a little harsh when I told you to just go away, for that I'm sorry

anyway, the firefox 11 nightly has been running great for me so far, mozilla's making some good progress performance wise :)

I just wish the memory use would drop.

Compare to what? All modern browsers have almost same RAM usage in this days, in Firefox, extensins are most of the time problematic once, some goodies will land ASAP in Fx and memory usage will go down, I've alredy notice that in latest Nightly RAM consumption is far smaller then it was ;)

Compare to what? All modern browsers have almost same RAM usage in this days, in Firefox, extensins are most of the time problematic once, some goodies will land ASAP in Fx and memory usage will go down, I've alredy notice that in latest Nightly RAM consumption is far smaller then it was ;)

IE 9.0. I have one tab open with Firefox and I am using 131,828KB. With one tab open with IE I use around 87,000KB. I understand that some extensions use a great deal of Ram but I still think Firefox can be lower. This is not a real concern to me as I have 16GB of Ram but it may be to some users.

OK, agree about IE but this browser is system native so there is huge diffrent in engine and code and when You look at overall usage difrent is not even 50MB where Firefox is open source code....

This looks like looking for hole where there is no hole :D

OK, agree about IE but this browser is system native so there is huge diffrent in engine and code and when You look at overall usage difrent is not even 50MB where Firefox is open source code....

This looks like looking for hole where there is no hole :D

I know what you mean. MS can hide the stats anywhere. :)

IE 9.0. I have one tab open with Firefox and I am using 131,828KB. With one tab open with IE I use around 87,000KB. I understand that some extensions use a great deal of Ram but I still think Firefox can be lower. This is not a real concern to me as I have 16GB of Ram but it may be to some users.

Based on ... ? Please don't tell me that you are looking at memory consumption in the task manager ...

I wish the memory use would drop also. Grinder, stop defending your statements. The comments are pointed, there is no right answer. Your "wish" is good enough and those that argue the point should review the definition of Trolling. I have an atom core processor and like to surf while watching watching 720p content. Asrock Ion 330 has a gpu but tends to freeze when launching Ff.

Well I am of the opinion that Mozilla should stop all of this silliness and concentrate on one Nightly build like they did before the rush to compete with Chrome (number wise). I am now using Firefox 11 and I can see not all of the difference between it and Firefox 4.

Agreed. They lost alot of people with delayed release dates. The switch from using a point system to implementing a entire new version is entirely Chrome. We had 3.5, then 3.6, and so on. Chrome has been gaining ground and those of us who have used Phoenix, Firebird, know the truth. 3 pages of arguing over this? He is right.

Yes they have. Firefox 11 has been running great. The fonts have improved as well as video quality., I just wish the memory use would drop.

Not sure why people are having problems with Firefox memory usage. Here's my stats for Firefox 9 (11 extensions) and Chrome 16 (8 extensions) with the exact same tabs open, Firefox has been running for at least 2 hours while Chrome was freshly launched for the test.

post-356036-0-67705300-1321236937.png

Agreed. They lost alot of people with delayed release dates. The switch from using a point system to implementing a entire new version is entirely Chrome. We had 3.5, then 3.6, and so on. Chrome has been gaining ground and those of us who have used Phoenix, Firebird, know the truth. 3 pages of arguing over this? He is right.

Do you have any logical arguments to put on the table or are you just ranting about your personal opinions?

IE 9.0. I have one tab open with Firefox and I am using 131,828KB. With one tab open with IE I use around 87,000KB. I understand that some extensions use a great deal of Ram but I still think Firefox can be lower. This is not a real concern to me as I have 16GB of Ram but it may be to some users.

Not sure why people are having problems with Firefox memory usage. Here's my stats for Firefox 9 (11 extensions) and Chrome 16 (8 extensions) with the exact same tabs open, Firefox has been running for at least 2 hours while Chrome was freshly launched for the test.

post-356036-0-67705300-1321236937.png

Memory consumption is moot when most people now have computers with at least 4GB ram these days. This is like saying I have a 250GB hd and Windows system files take up 15GB. Low ram footprint is always great, but I'm not worried about it when it means giving up performance.

Not sure why people are having problems with Firefox memory usage. Here's my stats for Firefox 9 (11 extensions) and Chrome 16 (8 extensions) with the exact same tabs open, Firefox has been running for at least 2 hours while Chrome was freshly launched for the test.

post-356036-0-67705300-1321236937.png

Do you have any logical arguments to put on the table or are you just ranting about your personal opinions?

If you are referring to me, I am not ranting about anything. Maybe you should read the prior two posts..

Memory consumption is moot when you have at least 4GB ram these days. This is like saying I have a 250GB hd and Windows system files take up 15GB. Low ram footprint is always great, but I'm not worried about it when it means giving up performance. Ram does help in temporarily caching data in memory to make it available faster than writing data on the hd and reading it back.

I posted that somewhere in this thread that the memory usage does not bother me as I have 16Gb of memory.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • Glow 26.9 by Razvan Serea Glow provides detailed reporting on every hardware component in your computer, saving you valuable time typically spent searching for CPU, motherboard, RAM, graphics card, and other stats. With Glow, all the information is conveniently presented in one clean interface, allowing you to easily access and review the comprehensive hardware details of your system. Glow provides detailed information on various system aspects, including OS, motherboard, processor, memory, graphics card, storage, network, battery, drivers, and services. The well-organized format ensures easy access to the required information. You can export all the gathered data to a plain text file, facilitating sharing with others for troubleshooting purposes. No installation needed. Just decompress the archive, launch the executable, and access computer-related information. Glow runs on Windows 11 and Windows 10 64-bit versions. Glow 26.9 changelog: New Features The processor hardware detection engine has been significantly enhanced beyond traditional Intel and AMD architectures. Native support is now available for modern platforms such as Apple Silicon (M-Series) and the newly introduced NVIDIA Spark. In addition, all ARM-based processors can now be accurately distinguished between ARM32 and ARM64 architectures, providing precise hardware reporting. This marks a major milestone for Glow's hardware detection capabilities. The RAM manufacturer identification algorithm has been expanded. JEDEC vendor codes for popular brands such as Patriot, PNY, Team Group, GeIL, Lexar (Longsys), and Asgard/Gloway have been integrated into the database. This significantly reduces the likelihood of incorrect or "Unknown Manufacturer" results and improves overall hardware detection accuracy. New Public IP Address and Internet Service Provider (ISP) features have been added to the Network section. To ensure reliability, this information is retrieved from the trusted service ipwho.is. When Hiding Mode is enabled, no requests are sent and these features remain hidden, as they may expose sensitive information. The search engine used in the Installed Drivers, Installed Services, and Installed Applications sections has been enhanced. You can now perform more flexible and accurate searches using initials, partial matches, and loosely arranged character sequences. The TS Preloader loading bar has been rebuilt using our modern TS Custom Controls graphics library, developed entirely in-house. As a result of this infrastructure upgrade, the loading bar now features smooth rendering and rounded corners that align with the visual style of Windows 11. [TS Updater] A new validation algorithm has been added to check whether the target application is currently running before the update process begins. Bug Fixes Resolved a condition that could prevent TS Preloader from shutting down safely during rare application crash scenarios. Fixed a text alignment issue in the Network section affecting the display of DNS addresses. Alignment is now rendered correctly. [TS Updater] Fixed an issue that could prevent the updated application's executable "*.exe" file from being located after the update process. [TS Updater] Fixed a bug that could leave outdated "*.sha256" files in the application directory after an update. [TS Updater] Fixed a rare issue that could cause subfolders to be moved into the root directory after an update. [TS Updater] Fixed an issue during the first launch that could cause flickering and a temporary white window appearance due to Windows Defender interactions. Changes A small improvement has been made to the internet connectivity detection algorithm. Connectivity checks are now performed in the background with minimal impact on the user interface thread. The keyboard shortcuts in the top menu have been reorganized and simplified to provide a consistent experience across all Türkaysoft applications and to avoid potential conflicts with standard Windows shortcuts. The TS Preloader splash image has been updated with a Türkiye-themed stadium design to celebrate Türkiye's qualification for the 2026 FIFA World Cup—its first appearance in 24 years. Congratulations, Türkiye! The TS Custom Controls module has been updated to version 26.6, delivering improved stability and a more polished visual appearance. [TS Updater] The application icon has been redesigned to provide a more modern and refined look. Note: Always unzip the program before using it. Otherwise you may get an error. Download: Glow 26.9 | 1.8 MB (Open Source) Links: Glow Homepage | Screenshot | Github Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • DWARF mini review: the world's smallest smart telescope for night and day sky captures by Steven Parker DWARFLAB reached out to me asking if I was interested in checking out the DWARF mini, which is a portable astronomy telescope designed for amateur astronomers. Why do I say it's for amateurs? Well, for starters, it's not what you'd call "high end"; it's more of a professional-grade starting point for amateurs serious about capturing what's up there in our night and day skies. A typical amateur astronomer is most likely thousands of dollars deep into the hobby, and I will make no claims that this DWARF mini (at a fraction of the cost) could replace it all, okay? Well, if you read on, it will be clearer what I am trying to convey. Disclosure: DWARFLAB provided a free sample without any editorial input or review pre-approval. I have always been interested in looking up and observing the night sky. I see satellites crossing the sky above my garden most nights, and I am always looking at the moon. Yeah, I have a 200MP camera on my phone, but at 200X zoom, AI takes over and makes the pretty moon pictures that I snap, the DWARF mini does not, you get an actual true picture of what you can barely see with the naked eye. Before we start, let's share the highlights of the DWARF mini in bite-sized format: Pocket-Sized & Ultra-Lightweight Weighing just 1.85 lbs (840g), the DWARF mini easily fits into a backpack or large pocket. Its all-in-one, compact design makes it the ultimate grab-and-go digital telescope for hiking, camping, or traveling to dark-sky locations. Intuitive App Control & Built-in Sky Atlas Go from unboxing to your first shot in just 3 minutes! The DWARFLAB App provides a seamless experience with an interactive star map. Simply select your target and start exploring without the steep learning curve of traditional setups. Auto GOTO & 360° Pivot Freedom Enjoy pinpoint automated tracking with full 360° rotation. Powered by a high-sensitivity Sony IMX662 sensor (1/2.8-inch, 2.9μm pixels), it captures amazing, low-noise astro details, bringing faint nebulas and star clusters to life with stunning clarity. Pro-Level EQ Mode & Long Exposure Unlock advanced deep-space imaging with Equatorial (EQ) Mode. Supporting impressive single-frame exposures up to 90 seconds and featuring built-in light pollution filters, it easily cuts through city glow to reveal intricate celestial structures. Smart Cloud Processing & All-Ages Fun Effortlessly enhance your raw data with integrated cloud processing for professional-grade results. Perfect for beginners, kids, and adults, this telescope makes exploring and sharing the wonders of the universe an exciting, family-friendly adventure. The packaging is a pretty minimal affair with the outer box opening like a flap to reveal the plastic mould of the DWARF mini sitting in it. Below, the Sun filter, charging cable, cleaning cloth, and documentation can be found. DWARFLAB also provided a Mini Hydraulic Tripod ($89.99), and I highly recommend getting it if you plan on purchasing the DWARF mini, as it fully supports the motorized tracking feature of the telescope; plus, at 840g, the weight of the telescope, you will need a tripod that supports more than the weight of a smartphone anyway. What's in the box DWARF Mini Smart Telescope × 1 Sun Filter x 1 Type-C to Type-C Cord x 1 Cleaning Cloth x 1 User Guide With that out of the way, here are the full specs: DWARF mini Dimensions (DWH): 60.70 mm x 100.38 × 183.61 (2.39" x 3.95" x 7.23") Weight: 840g (1.85lbs) Aperture diameter: 30 mm (telephoto), 3.4 mm (wide angle) Image Sensor: SONY IMX662 1/2.8" (Telephoto) OmniVision OS02K10 1/2.8" (Wide-angle) Focal length: 150 mm (telephoto), 6.7 mm (wide-angle) Equivalent focal length: 1016 mm (telephoto), 45 mm (wide-angle) Shutter Speed: Tele - 1/10000-90s, Wide - 1/10000-30s Maximum exposure time: 90s (telephoto & wide-angle), Both in EQ mode Rotation range: Lens: 225°, Base: 360° Effective Pixels: 2.07M Maximum Resolution: 1920 × 1080 (Telephoto & Wide-angle) Built-in filters: Astro, Dark, Duo-Band (Telephoto), Astro (Wide-angle) Output: JPG, FITS, TIFF, MP4 Shooting Mode: Photos, Videos, Astronomy, Burst Shooting, Time-lapse Photography Storage: 64 GB Battery: Built-in 7000 mAh, supports external USB charging Charging Port: Type-C NPU: 1 TOPS Features: WiFi, NFC NFC One-Touch Connection Astronomy Post-Processing/Appointment Shooting/Astronomy Mosaic Wi-Fi Transmission Range: 15m (open environment) Color: Black Compatibility: iOS & Android smartphones/tablets Warranty: 2-years (24-months) MSRP: $399 Design Charge port On/off button Lens On the DWARF mini itself, it is a pretty minimal affair. On one side, there is a Type-C USB port to charge the non-removable 7000 mAh battery, and on the other side, a large button to power on or off the telescope. The button is flanked by an LED that is green when connected via the DWARFLAB app, or lights up red when being powered off. Below the button, there are four LEDs that indicate battery power. The DWARF mini does not have any sharp edges as all sides are rounded off; it has a good heft to it, but the weight of it feels quite balanced in the hand, so it isn't top or bottom-heavy. On the front there is the DWARFLAB logo which is quite small and there are no other markings on it. The tripod offers full 360° rotation of the motorized base, which allows for tracking for the time-lapse mode, but also for the 90-second captures of nearer objects in the sky, such as the Sun or the moon. Usage To get started, simply power on the DWARF mini and open the DWARFLAB app, tap on Connect, and it will scan for the DWARF mini over the Wi-Fi network. The device supports both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz Wi-Fi, as well as Bluetooth for discovery, so connection issues were minimal in my experience with it. As previously noted in the specs, the DWARF mini will stay connected with a phone or tablet up to 15 meters in an open environment, such as a backyard. Lighting status Powering on: The green circular light will rotate and breathe in turn Powering off: The red circular light is gradually extinguished Connecting: Green light strip rotating Connected: Green light strip solid/always on 4 lights 1= 0-25%, 2= 25-50%, 3= 50-75%, 4= 75-100% battery power To view the full lighting status, such as tracking mode and connection failure, you can check the user guide on the official DWARFLAB page. DWARFLAB app Above, you can see the steps undertaken to connect the DWARFLAB app to my Galaxy S26 Ultra. Weirdly, I got an alert that a firmware update failed to get uploaded to the DWARF mini the first time, but upon retrying, it worked. Then place the DWARF mini outside, make sure your smartphone or tablet is connected to it, and then head back inside, because you can manage it from the comfort of your home. Simply enter the Atlas tab in the app and search for what you want to capture, and then tap on the camera icon; the DWARF mini will then attempt to track the object and give you a live view right on your connected device. Results I've had the DWARF mini since April, but even though my garden is south-facing, I had a lot of trouble trying to capture a good image of the moon. In the end, it was possible after I took it with me on a trip to my parents in Southend, UK, at the end of May. Here is a capture of the moon, resulting from 20 stacked images over a 90-second exposure. What you are seeing here is not AI-assisted. A good example of what I mean is the latest flagships with their 200MP cameras claiming to capture things like closeups of the moon, and while they are not as good as the above example on the DWARF mini, the resulting image on smartphones is actually AI-assisted above 30X zoom. Here is an example of a similar shot at the moon at 200X zoom using an HONOR Magic8 Pro. The difference is clear. Next, here we have a shot of the daytime moon. Here is a shot of Arcturus, the red giant star, which is the fourth brightest in the night sky. As previously mentioned, it could be a bit clearer, but clouds passing in front of it muddied the shot a bit. The Sun The DWARF mini also ships with a sun filter, meaning you can take great shots of the sun as well. Tracking Sun Resulting (stacked) shot Live zoom The pictures themselves are limited to Full HD, and some of the examples actually came out in HD (1280x720), but this is because the standard telescopic result is in 720p while "Wide" is in 1080p. Above you can see how in the app the Sun is tracked, the resulting capture, and Live zoom. I have only scratched the surface of what is possible with this telescope; I found several examples online of shots of the Milky Way, among others, such as nebulae and galaxies. All of this requires patience and knowledge, although if you know what you are looking for, simply enter it in the Atlas tab in the DWARFLAB app, tap the camera icon, and the telescope will attempt to track it. Conclusion The good The DWARF mini definitely places itself in a price point that makes astrology accessible to anyone looking to get started in the hobby. Say you want to have a closer look at the moon, simply enter it in the Atlas, and the Live view also lets you zoom in and snap pictures. The bad Some issues I came across while operating the DWARF mini were that it sometimes failed to connect unless I held my smartphone right next to it, and finding and tracking sometimes took several attempts to get it calibrated. I discovered that it helped if I sort of positioned and pointed the telescope in the general area it was supposed to detect, but this obviously wouldn't work with objects you can't see with the naked eye; more testing is required for that. Another bit of advice is to ensure that the lens is clean. While making the examples of live zooming on the sun, I discovered that the telescope lens and sun filter were not completely clean, and only after cleaning with a microfiber cloth was I able to get a decent shot of the sun. Where to buy and a coupon Okay, $399 is not cheap for a side hobby, but nor is a $1,500 smartphone flagship that you'll most likely have for a couple of years. This is a one-time entrance into astrology, and it won't become obsolete in one year like a smartphone. It's a thumbs up from me. The DWARF mini is available to buy right now in the U.S. and U.K. at the links below. DWARF mini for $399 on the official site DWARF mini for $399 on Amazon U.S. Use the NEOWIN5OFF coupon code for an additional 5% off at checkout (expires June 21) As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Adobe Acrobat Reader Dis Continued
    • The name, you mean? If so, it's actually the objects common name. There's another one called NGC 7293 which is also known as Helix Nebula (because we're looking at a helix structure top down) but other times also known as the Eye of God. You'll understand when you see it
    • Welcome to Neowin! Enjoy your stay!
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      pestcontrol46 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pestcontrol46 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      505
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      272
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      71
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!