PDA

View Full Version : Chrome may become Ubuntu's browser?



christoph411
June 14th, 2011, 09:31 PM
Just found this! I don't understand. I could see firefox being replaced with CHROMIUM, but Chrome? :o

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-20071079-92/chrome-may-become-ubuntus-browser/?tag=cnetRiver


Also, some additional reading on Mark Shuttleworth's thoughts on Google Chrome

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390027/chrome_nearly_replaced_firefox_ubuntu_linux_mark_s huttleworth_says/?fp=4&fpid=1968336438

sanguinoso
June 14th, 2011, 09:33 PM
Agreed that it should be chromium and not chrome.

castrojo
June 14th, 2011, 09:42 PM
That's likely a misquote (lots of people mix up Chrome and Chromium) as the only one discussed at UDS has been Chromium.

MBybee
June 14th, 2011, 09:44 PM
Chromium replaced firefox as my default browser in Ubuntu - so I could definitely see it.

Firefox just didn't make it to 4 for me (despite it being my favorite browser for... wow, ages)

Legendary_Bibo
June 14th, 2011, 09:55 PM
I use Chrome, not Chromium on Ubuntu. Firefox is just too slow at starting, and just feels sluggish.

3Miro
June 14th, 2011, 10:04 PM
Chromium may become the default browser as it is FOSS.

Chrome is proprietary and making it default would be a violation to the Ubuntu philosophy. Chrome will not be the default browser.

LowSky
June 14th, 2011, 10:04 PM
I use chrome on ubuntu and chromium on arch. I dont really see much difference in the two. someone please enlighten me.

Firefox has recently become my number 2 browser. Chrom(ium)[e] just seems to work better these days.

Dry Lips
June 14th, 2011, 10:05 PM
I use Chrome, not Chromium on Ubuntu. Firefox is just too slow at starting, and just feels sluggish.

What does Chrome do that Chromium doesn't?


---
Btw, FireFox is my main browser, Chromium is good number two.

Copper Bezel
June 14th, 2011, 10:09 PM
The icon's prettier (and the bundled Flash plugin for the 32 bit seems more dependable.)

christoph411
June 14th, 2011, 10:10 PM
I agree that Firefox should be replaced (I personally hate Firefox with its sluggish start up times) but I really thought it would be replaced with Chromium, since Chromium is open source. It's also possible that it was a misquote (like castrojo said) but that is an awfully big misquote! :D
Also, wouldn't using Chrome and not Chromium require some sort of partnership between Google and Canonical? :confused:

Legendary_Bibo
June 14th, 2011, 10:14 PM
Chromium may become the default browser as it is FOSS.

Chrome is proprietary and making it default would be a violation to the Ubuntu philosophy. Chrome will not be the default browser.

I thought their philosophy was to make the most easy and easily accessible home desktop Linux distro. Chrome fits that picture.

nmaster
June 14th, 2011, 10:17 PM
What does Chrome do that Chromium doesn't?


---
Btw, FireFox is my main browser, Chromium is good number two.

in addition to having a flash plugin bundled, it also has (imho) a slick built in pdf viewer.

el_koraco
June 14th, 2011, 10:20 PM
The icon's prettier (and the bundled Flash plugin for the 32 bit seems more dependable.)

It just seems that way. Once you add the flash aid plugin to FF, things change rapidly.

3Miro
June 14th, 2011, 10:20 PM
I thought their philosophy was to make the most easy and easily accessible home desktop Linux distro. Chrome fits that picture.

No!

Ubuntu like most (if not all) Linux distributions is based on the philosophy of software freedom. Chrome doesn't give you freedom, neither Canonical nor the users have the right to examine change or modify Chrome. They will have to completely rely on Google to approve, implement and maintain any features or bugfixes.

Chromium is another story. Chromium respects your freedom just as much as Firefox. Chromium may become default, Chrome will not.

akand074
June 14th, 2011, 10:38 PM
I'd have probably switched to chrome, but Firefox's add-on quality still seems to trump chrome's from my experience. If Ubuntu decides to change to chromium for 12.10, I'll likely respect their decision and use it.

christoph411
June 14th, 2011, 10:40 PM
in addition to having a flash plugin bundled, it also has (imho) a slick built in pdf viewer.

That's one of my favorite features of Chrome! I use Chromium, and find myself missing the built in PDF viewer more and more. There are a few extensions for Chromium that allow you to view PDFs in the browser (Google Docs viewer) but none of them allow page by page in-browser printing! :mad:

ivanovnegro
June 14th, 2011, 10:42 PM
No!

Ubuntu like most (if not all) Linux distributions is based on the philosophy of software freedom. Chrome doesn't give you freedom, neither Canonical nor the users have the right to examine change or modify Chrome. They will have to completely rely on Google to approve, implement and maintain any features or bugfixes.

Chromium is another story. Chromium respects your freedom just as much as Firefox. Chromium may become default, Chrome will not.

I really saw Chrome, not Chromium. Not a big fan of the decision but it would fit in the allround image of Canonical.
Ubuntu already ships with some proprietary stuff in the Software Center, like Drobbox/Skype...
Also Chromium is more the testing bed for Chrome, as it really is much the same, Chrome is the full product, yet mentioned with the integrated Flash and PDF viewer what Chromium does not have. Users outside from Linux are also more familiar with "Chrome" as the name and branding of this browser.

Edit: Here (http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/061311-mark-shuttleworth.html) some read.

Copper Bezel
June 14th, 2011, 10:42 PM
It just seems that way. Once you add the flash aid plugin to FF, things change rapidly.
Are we still talking about the difference between Chrome and Chromium, or is this in reference to the difference between Chrome and Firefox? I don't use Firefox, so I don't have any experience with Flash Aid. (I actually use Opera for browsing, but Chrome for video.)

Edit: Dropbox installs from a PPA, the same as Chrome. It only seems to ship standard. = )

Ctrl-Alt-F1
June 14th, 2011, 10:50 PM
in addition to having a flash plugin bundled, it also has (imho) a slick built in pdf viewer.

Agreed. I use Chrome, not Chromium.

3Miro
June 14th, 2011, 10:55 PM
I really saw Chrome, not Chromium. Not a big fan of the decision but it would fit in the allround image of Canonical.
Ubuntu already ships with some proprietary stuff in the Software Center, like Drobbox/Skype...
Also Chromium is more the testing bed for Chrome, as it really is much the same, Chrome is the full product, yet mentioned with the integrated Flash and PDF viewer what Chromium does not have. Users outside from Linux are also more familiar with "Chrome" as the name and branding of this browser.

Edit: Here (http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/061311-mark-shuttleworth.html) some read.

There is a big difference between having the option to install proprietary software and having such software installed by default. Also, Skype comes from Skype, Canonical just has the link to it, they don't host Skype or support Skype.

Sometimes you have to use proprietary software like drivers (if hardware doesn't run without them). However, we have both Firefox and Chromium as very nice FOSS browsers, there is no reason to go with Chrome.

I hope Chrome doesn't become default, this will turn many of us away.

el_koraco
June 14th, 2011, 11:05 PM
Are we still talking about the difference between Chrome and Chromium, or is this in reference to the difference between Chrome and Firefox? I don't use Firefox, so I don't have any experience with Flash Aid. (I actually use Opera for browsing, but Chrome for video.)


We're talking Chrome-Chromium here. Chromium, and 64-bit Chrome, use the flashplugin-installer package. You need FF to handle the Flash Aid extension, and then you can use the package in Chromium. The difference is profound.

I don't really care about the browsers myself, but ditching Firefox, which has been the flagship of open source development for years, for Chrome(ium), which is the new kid in town, seems kinda lame.

GWBouge
June 14th, 2011, 11:15 PM
According to this article and interview (http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/061311-mark-shuttleworth.html), it's Firefox until at least 12.04, and then they'll consider Chrome as the default. Seems Shuttleworth has a lot of good things to say about Google products, even Chrome OS.

whatthefunk
June 14th, 2011, 11:20 PM
I dont see what the big deal is.

sudo apt-get remove --purge chrome

cgroza
June 14th, 2011, 11:22 PM
I think I will add this to my post install script:


apt-get purge chromium-browser
apt-get install firefox-4.0

el_koraco
June 14th, 2011, 11:23 PM
you guys should really use aptitude, it handles dependencies much better...

whatthefunk
June 14th, 2011, 11:28 PM
you guys should really use aptitude, it handles dependencies much better...

So that would be...

sudo aptitude remove --purge program_name
????

el_koraco
June 14th, 2011, 11:29 PM
No idea!

Copper Bezel
June 14th, 2011, 11:34 PM
Simply sudo aptitude purge *, according to the manual. (I mean, not actually asterisk, as the consequences seem dire.)

ivanovnegro
June 14th, 2011, 11:34 PM
There is a big difference between having the option to install proprietary software and having such software installed by default. Also, Skype comes from Skype, Canonical just has the link to it, they don't host Skype or support Skype.

Sometimes you have to use proprietary software like drivers (if hardware doesn't run without them). However, we have both Firefox and Chromium as very nice FOSS browsers, there is no reason to go with Chrome.

I hope Chrome doesn't become default, this will turn many of us away.

I am not anymore so sure about this free software thing from Canonical, Ubuntu is not Debian or Fedora anyway, the "real" promoter of GNU and free software.

sffvba[e0rt
June 14th, 2011, 11:34 PM
you guys should really use aptitude, it handles dependencies much better...


No idea!

Sounds like a rubbish statement to me...


404

el_koraco
June 14th, 2011, 11:37 PM
I was just messing around. With myself actually, should have put a smiley on there or sth. An apt vs aptitude flame war almost broke out today, so I reminisced. ):P

speedwell68
June 14th, 2011, 11:39 PM
I think I will add this to my post install script:


apt-get purge chromium-browser
apt-get install firefox-4.0


+1.

People seem all hung up on the relative speed of their browser these days. I will agree that Chromium based seem to be marginally quicker that Firefox, but speed alone does not make a browser. I have been switching between Chromium and Firefox for a while now and I have to say that, in my opinion, Firefox is by far the better product.

Ctrl-Alt-F1
June 14th, 2011, 11:40 PM
I don't really care about the browsers myself, but ditching Firefox, which has been the flagship of open source development for years, for Chrome(ium), which is the new kid in town, seems kinda lame.

Why? Just because it's the same old thing? That's a pretty terrible reason.

I'm not disagreeing that Firefox should continue to be the default. More people still use Firefox by a large margin, so it just makes sense to continue using it.


<--Rant-->
For what it's worth, I find developing on FF4 practically unbearable. The memory problems get out of control on a routine basis, requiring restarts. If left on overnight, the browser has crashed by morning. I haven't had any of those problems with Chrome OR IE. Normally I wouldn't bring this up but as it is a single user experience but the fact that Mozilla is building a task force just to improve memory usage in Firefox is validation enough for me.

malspa
June 14th, 2011, 11:44 PM
The icon's prettier

Funny, I always thought that Chromium's icon was cooler, and that Chrome's was much too gaudy.

Anyway, it doesn't matter much to me what the default browser is, but if Chromium's available by default or in the repos, I'd use that instead of Chrome.

MBybee
June 14th, 2011, 11:47 PM
+1.

People seem all hung up on the relative speed of their browser these days. I will agree that Chromium based seem to be marginally quicker that Firefox, but speed alone does not make a browser. I have been switching between Chromium and Firefox for a while now and I have to say that, in my opinion, Firefox is by far the better product.

I'm definitely hung up on speed and memory use. When FF runs my system into swap (with 4GB of RAM), that's a problem. I can run chromium for weeks without a restart and never hit swap.

I also just never got the hang of 4. It didn't work with pages I had been routinely using with 3, it crashed a LOT, and they removed all the features that made me use FF over Chrome in the first place.

DinoT1985
June 14th, 2011, 11:50 PM
Why? Just because it's the same old thing? That's a pretty terrible reason.

I'm not disagreeing that Firefox should continue to be the default. More people still use Firefox by a large margin, so it just makes sense to continue using it.


<--Rant-->
For what it's worth I find developing on FF4 practically unbearable the memory problems get out of control on a routine basis, requiring restarts. If left on overnight, the browser has crashed by morning. I haven't had any of those problems with Chrome OR IE. Normally I wouldn't bring this up but as it is a single user experience but the fact that Mozilla is building a task force just to improve memory usage in Firefox is validation enough for me.

Your experience, not the same as mine. I've used Firefox 4 that was open for 2 days straight in work and the 3rd day it was just as fast.

However with Chrome I haven't been able to view a few sites I have bookmarked without occurring problems.

Let them use Chrome by default. I'll be removing it on install day and downloading Firefox and Opera.

speedwell68
June 14th, 2011, 11:51 PM
I'm definitely hung up on speed and memory use. When FF runs my system into swap (with 4GB of RAM), that's a problem. I can run chromium for weeks without a restart and never hit swap.



I too have 4GB of ram and FF4 doesn't even touch the sides, strange.

Ctrl-Alt-F1
June 14th, 2011, 11:58 PM
Your experience, not the same as mine. I've used Firefox 4 that was open for 2 days straight in work and the 3rd day it was just as fast.

However with Chrome I haven't been able to view a few sites I have bookmarked without occurring problems.

Let them use Chrome by default. I'll be removing it on install day and downloading Firefox and Opera.

Fair enough. My work computer is a piece of crud anyway. What platform do you develop on? We us .ASP/C# at work, and I'm not a really big fan.

ivanovnegro
June 15th, 2011, 12:06 AM
What I observed is that both have advantages and disadvantages, the open source arguments aside.
Chrome/ium was faster and maybe is today but FF is as fast with the version 4.
When I compared both I see the same RAM usage, no difference, I dont know why people think Chrome is somehow lighter, at least I never expereinced it, they are on par for me.
And one thing I always did not like about Chrome and all other browsers, Opera included, they dont open 100% of the sites I am visiting, FF is still the one that can handle all web sites, but I have to agree that with version 4 there are also some problems now in this area.

Honestly they are all the same now, Opera, FF, Chrome/ium, all are mainstream browsers, all are somehow memory hogs when you use them the whole day or two without rebooting.
Its only personal preference which features you need or like from a browser.

MBybee
June 15th, 2011, 12:07 AM
I too have 4GB of ram and FF4 doesn't even touch the sides, strange.

The weird part is FF3 never did - I'm typically a moderate use kind of person. 10 tabs or less, most of the time, though I do use flash quite a bit (MechQuest, AdventureQuest, plus Grid Control and EM are flash heavy).

Defaults are defaults though, and while I would welcome the change, I don't think it'd be life altering one way or the other... unlike Unity, Empathy, and Evolution. Ugh.

Legendary_Bibo
June 15th, 2011, 12:14 AM
I hope Chrome doesn't become default, this will turn many of us away.

No it won't.

Honestly it just seems like if there's any change at all to any distro everyone jumps on board the bandwagon of "if you change this I'm no longer using your distro and switching to <insert distro here>" as if you're being forced to upgrade.

Some people may want upgrades without upgrades, but some of us prefer progress.

Also, Canonical/Ubuntu has never had a problem with proprietary software, if you've noticed they're not one of the freedom fighters. In fact there's even a spin off that uses no proprietary software if someone really wants that.

Bandit
June 15th, 2011, 12:20 AM
That's likely a misquote (lots of people mix up Chrome and Chromium) as the only one discussed at UDS has been Chromium.

True, but I dont understand why not stay with Fx. Its the most compatible browser out and is very popular with most everyone.

It would just end up being something else I would have to uninstall and replace..

Bandit
June 15th, 2011, 12:24 AM
No it won't.

Honestly it just seems like if there's any change at all to any distro everyone jumps on board the bandwagon of "if you change this I'm no longer using your distro and switching to <insert distro here>" as if you're being forced to upgrade.

Some people may want upgrades without upgrades, but some of us prefer progress.

Also, Canonical/Ubuntu has never had a problem with proprietary software, if you've noticed they're not one of the freedom fighters. In fact there's even a spin off that uses no proprietary software if someone really wants that.

I may not leave Ubuntu, but I sure would be pissed if it was default.

On a technical point. I can not use Chromium due to its incompatibilities and inconsistencies. One day when it gets more matured and the bugs worked out, then that may change. Currently tho its not an option for serious web programmers.

3Miro
June 15th, 2011, 12:28 AM
No it won't.

Honestly it just seems like if there's any change at all to any distro everyone jumps on board the bandwagon of "if you change this I'm no longer using your distro and switching to <insert distro here>" as if you're being forced to upgrade.

Some people may want upgrades without upgrades, but some of us prefer progress.

Also, Canonical/Ubuntu has never had a problem with proprietary software, if you've noticed they're not one of the freedom fighters. In fact there's even a spin off that uses no proprietary software if someone really wants that.

We are talking about default vs optional. Currently, there is no proprietary software with a default Ubuntu installation and that is the part that Canonical supports. Any additional software comes form the community. One should have the freedom to install anything that they want, but there is no reason why Chrome should be the default instead of FF/Chromium.

Some people will leave some people will stay. However, the number of people that would be willing to contribute to proprietary project would be disproportionately small.

Legendary_Bibo
June 15th, 2011, 12:39 AM
We are talking about default vs optional. Currently, there is no proprietary software with a default Ubuntu installation and that is the part that Canonical supports. Any additional software comes form the community. One should have the freedom to install anything that they want, but there is no reason why Chrome should be the default instead of FF/Chromium.

Some people will leave some people will stay. However, the number of people that would be willing to contribute to proprietary project would be disproportionately small.

Isn't there a checkbox to install mp3 codecs and flash during the 11.04 installation?

3Miro
June 15th, 2011, 12:53 AM
Isn't there a checkbox to install mp3 codecs and flash during the 11.04 installation?

There is a checkbox for something, but it never installed Flash or mp3 support (at least not in my case). I do have working internet connection during install, I am even browsing the net while installing. I always had to install ubuntu-restricted-extras separately and this is on several installations of 10.10 and 11.04.

If they put a checkbox chrome vs chromium vs FF than I can live with it. So long as they support a FOSS browser.

smellyman
June 15th, 2011, 12:59 AM
Chrome/ium blows.

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 01:01 AM
No it won't.

Honestly it just seems like if there's any change at all to any distro everyone jumps on board the bandwagon of "if you change this I'm no longer using your distro and switching to <insert distro here>" as if you're being forced to upgrade.

Some people may want upgrades without upgrades, but some of us prefer progress.

Also, Canonical/Ubuntu has never had a problem with proprietary software, if you've noticed they're not one of the freedom fighters. In fact there's even a spin off that uses no proprietary software if someone really wants that.


Isn't there a checkbox to install mp3 codecs and flash during the 11.04 installation?

+1
and
+1

I wish that people wouldn't overreact every time there is a minuscule change in the default programs, settings, etc...

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 01:04 AM
This thread was not intended to be a flame war over Firefox vs. Chrome/ium, so lets try to keep it positive and on topic... :KS

smellyman
June 15th, 2011, 01:07 AM
This thread WAS NOT, AND IS NOT intended to be a flame war over Firefox vs. Chrome/ium, so lets try to keep it positive and on topic...

ok boss

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 01:10 AM
ok boss

Sorry smellyman, I didn't mean to sound like that or point that last comment towards you. I'm not trying to put a damper on your opinion, just a friendly reminder to everybody! ;)

Spr0k3t
June 15th, 2011, 01:19 AM
If Chromium or Chrome (either one) looked like it fit better with the rest of the operating system like what you find in Firefox or Empathy (for gnome users anyway), I wouldn't mind. Right now though, it sticks out like a sore thumb.

alphacrucis2
June 15th, 2011, 01:40 AM
What does Chrome do that Chromium doesn't?


---
Btw, FireFox is my main browser, Chromium is good number two.

Displays google branding maybe?

Warpnow
June 15th, 2011, 01:59 AM
Not sure if this is still the case, but for a little while there Chrome worked with Youtube's HTML5 version but Chromium did not because of the codec they use.

And, yeah, I think Ubuntu should ditch Firefox for Chrome. Better technology. I'm not even sure why FF bothers continuing to develop. Chrome is slowly making it obsolete. They're like the company making VHS when DVDs started getting popular.

3Miro
June 15th, 2011, 02:01 AM
Not sure if this is still the case, but for a little while there Chrome worked with Youtube's HTML5 version but Chromium did not because of the codec they use.


I have been watching HTML5 YouTube videos with Chromium for weeks now. Whatever the issue was, it is resolved now.

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 02:17 AM
Added a poll just for kicks... Make sure to vote! :)

qamelian
June 15th, 2011, 02:18 AM
And, yeah, I think Ubuntu should ditch Firefox for Chrome. Better technology. I'm not even sure why FF bothers continuing to develop. Chrome is slowly making it obsolete.
In your opinion. In mine, Chrome/Chromium still doesn't even come close to Firefox and, on all of my test hardware, is a much bigger resource. The only time I find Firefox slower than Chromium is on really old hardware. on any of my machines from the past 3 years, Firefox is just as fast and responsive as Chrome.

They can make Chromium the default in Ubuntu if they like. I still won't use it as my default browser.

Bandit
June 15th, 2011, 02:32 AM
In your opinion. In mine, Chrome/Chromium still doesn't even come close to Firefox and, on all of my test hardware, is a much bigger resource. The only time I find Firefox slower than Chromium is on really old hardware. on any of my machines from the past 3 years, Firefox is just as fast and responsive as Chrome.

They can make Chromium the default in Ubuntu if they like. I still won't use it as my default browser.

Same here.

The only time I really see Chromium or Chrome faster are on my Netbook. I actually use it on there for normal surfing. But when I use it for school and have to program in XML and XLST or work on PHP or even Javascript programs, it either doesnt work or isnt displaying like it should. I still find IE more compatible then Chome/ium blends, which is sad. Firefox is much much more compatible with W3C standards.

SO what ever browser is used, it should be the one that is the most compatible with W3C standards; as long as its OpenSource. Looks or name are optional.
I believe that is something most here are overlooking in their debates.

That said, I wouldnt mind seeing a new installation start up screen with a lot of start up options like giving the users ability to choose a default browser and or download Chromium, Opera or another one of their choosing. We shouldnt be trying to limit and force our own rules on each other. Our ability to choose what we NEED or what we WANT are what makes Linux so great. :-)

Legendary_Bibo
June 15th, 2011, 02:36 AM
I chose Chrome.

eltonw
June 15th, 2011, 02:51 AM
Just found this! I don't understand. I could see firefox being replaced with CHROMIUM, but Chrome? :o

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-20071079-92/chrome-may-become-ubuntus-browser/?tag=cnetRiver

According to Wikipedia Chrome is basically Chromium, except that the latter is fully open source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome

I find that Firefox is much slower to load than the Chrome beta (both the one on my netbook, and and the one on my Macbook.

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 03:46 AM
Found another great article about the background information on Mark Shuttleworth's statements about replacing Firefox with Chrome.
Make sure to check it out if you have some spare time! :KS

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390027/chrome_nearly_replaced_firefox_ubuntu_linux_mark_s huttleworth_says/?fp=4&fpid=1968336438

alphacrucis2
June 15th, 2011, 03:51 AM
According to Wikipedia Chrome is basically Chromium, except that the latter is fully open source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome

I find that Firefox is much slower to load than the Chrome beta (both the one on my netbook, and and the one on my Macbook.


The wiki article also suggests that Chrome has google spyware in it. Thanks but no thanks.

hereticus
June 15th, 2011, 04:20 AM
I travel a lot. I exclusively use a netbook. Then there was that rum and coke incident which killed my computer. With Chrome or Chromium, all of my plugins, addons and bookmarks were automatically restored as soon as I entered my gmail username and password. Firefox makes this an excruciating process. Then there is the screen usage issue. Chromium and chrome use much less space to accomplish the same thing.

Bitrate
June 15th, 2011, 04:20 AM
The wiki article also suggests that Chrome has google spyware in it. Thanks but no thanks.

That's a good enough reason to give Chrome the flick.

All of Google's products have embedded spyware (including Android) and little or no regard for the privacy of end-user data. In effect, their software products are data mining tools which work against the user. People should be boycotting Google and not supporting them. They are a bigger threat to your freedom than Microsoft.

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 04:49 AM
Just a quick question for anybody who voted Firefox... Why did you vote for Firefox? What advantages do you see in Firefox compared to Chrome/ium, and what are some disadvantages that you see in using Chrome/ium?
So basically, in your opinion, what makes Firefox better than all the others?

(this is not a troll post on my part, but I'm curious to see everybody else's point of view and encourage positive and constructive feedback!) :)

Ctrl-Alt-F1
June 15th, 2011, 05:23 AM
I chose Chrome because it has some brand recognition for users who are new to Linux and who might not recognize chromium. Of course Ubuntu can't actually distribute Chrome (can they?) so maybe my selection was silly.

Firefox is okay but I've had issues with it occasionally on every version of Ubuntu I've used. FF4 has been really buggy for my development environment at work. Chrome has been flawless on Windows/Linux for me.

Copper Bezel
June 15th, 2011, 05:27 AM
Just a quick question for anybody who voted Firefox... Why did you vote for Firefox? What advantages do you see in Firefox compared to Chrome/ium, and what are some disadvantages that you see in using Chrome/ium?
So basically, in your opinion, what makes Firefox better than all the others?

It's all been said already, but I'll recap.

* Firefox is a cross-platform standard. Anyone with any sense has been using it for years regardless of the operating system.

* Firefox is also more broadly compatible with sloppily coded websites in the way that IE is, by forcing developers who can't follow standards to write sloppy code for it, too.

* It's associated with open source development in general - it's the one open source app everyone knows about. It's like Linux brand identity.

* It's very full-featured, extensible, and customizable. It fits a broad cross-section of users' habits.

* It isn't, by default, skinned in a way that makes it look completely alien on an average Linux desktop.

In general, it's the good old FOSS workhorse of web browsing, and it's the last applictation I think Ubuntu should consider switching out for something else on a simple calculus of performance. I'd see Ubuntu phase out Nautilus before Firefox. It's just a good default.

I can uninstall it myself, thanks. = P

smellyman
June 15th, 2011, 05:50 AM
It's all been said already, but I'll recap.

* Firefox is a cross-platform standard. Anyone with any sense has been using it for years regardless of the operating system.

* Firefox is also more broadly compatible with sloppily coded websites in the way that IE is, by forcing developers who can't follow standards to write sloppy code for it, too.

* It's associated with open source development in general - it's the one open source app everyone knows about. It's like Linux brand identity.

* It's very full-featured, extensible, and customizable. It fits a broad cross-section of users' habits.

* It isn't, by default, skinned in a way that makes it look completely alien on an average Linux desktop.

In general, it's the good old FOSS workhorse of web browsing, and it's the last applictation I think Ubuntu should consider switching out for something else on a simple calculus of performance. I'd see Ubuntu phase out Nautilus before Firefox. It's just a good default.

I can uninstall it myself, thanks. = P


This

and

uses a lot less RAM when opening more than 3 tabs

Has Zoom text only (a must for me)

Looks a million times better

could care less about a 2 ms startup time diff.

Highly configurable

Renders web pages much better



and isn't google....

wolfen69
June 15th, 2011, 05:51 AM
I don't really care what the default browser is. It could be midori, or dillo. I know I can change it.

dinamic1
June 15th, 2011, 05:52 AM
I use Firefox on Ubuntu. Chrome is just as slow at starting, and just feels sluggish.
:p

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 06:08 AM
It's all been said already, but I'll recap.

* Firefox is a cross-platform standard. Anyone with any sense has been using it for years regardless of the operating system.

* Firefox is also more broadly compatible with sloppily coded websites in the way that IE is, by forcing developers who can't follow standards to write sloppy code for it, too.

* It's associated with open source development in general - it's the one open source app everyone knows about. It's like Linux brand identity.

* It's very full-featured, extensible, and customizable. It fits a broad cross-section of users' habits.

* It isn't, by default, skinned in a way that makes it look completely alien on an average Linux desktop.

In general, it's the good old FOSS workhorse of web browsing, and it's the last applictation I think Ubuntu should consider switching out for something else on a simple calculus of performance. I'd see Ubuntu phase out Nautilus before Firefox. It's just a good default.

I can uninstall it myself, thanks. = P


This

and

uses a lot less RAM when opening more than 3 tabs

Has Zoom text only (a must for me)

Looks a million times better

could care less about a 2 ms startup time diff.

Highly configurable

Renders web pages much better



and isn't google....


Thanks for the answers guys! I guess the only thing that I can think of that Chrome/ium has that Firefox 4 doesn't is a slight speed advantage (at least on my machine) ;)
The one thing I really always liked about Firefox was the selection and quality of the extensions available.

whatthefunk
June 15th, 2011, 06:40 AM
Its weird to me that so many people care so much about what the default program is. Half the default programs that come with my OS are dumped first thing after install. I wonder how many people would get violent if the default terminal in Ubuntu changed....

Legendary_Bibo
June 15th, 2011, 06:54 AM
:p

Don't quote me and change what I said. I use Chrome on Ubuntu because it's fast at starting, and doesn't feel sluggish. Screw Firefox.

Copper Bezel
June 15th, 2011, 07:03 AM
Its weird to me that so many people care so much about what the default program is. Half the default programs that come with my OS are dumped first thing after install. I wonder how many people would get violent if the default terminal in Ubuntu changed....
I don't care for my own use, and I don't even have Firefox installed, myself. The question of what ought to be default is an interesting one, though, and it could have a bearing on the reception of both the OS and the browser in question.

I'm an absolute Opera fanboy, myself. I don't care about the terminal (default or otherwise) except in that Gnome Terminal is the only pretty one. = )

whatthefunk
June 15th, 2011, 07:10 AM
it could have a bearing on the reception of both the OS and the browser in question.

I dont know about that. Windows is the most popular OS in the world and has without question the worst browser as default. Would you pass up on an otherwise brilliant OS simply because of the default browser, something that can be changed in two minutes time?

Legendary_Bibo
June 15th, 2011, 07:10 AM
I'm an absolute Opera fanboy, myself. I don't care about the terminal (default or otherwise) except in that Gnome Terminal is the only pretty one. = )

I like how Gnome-Terminal lets you put a background image.

Copper Bezel
June 15th, 2011, 07:39 AM
I dont know about that. Windows is the most popular OS in the world and has without question the worst browser as default. Would you pass up on an otherwise brilliant OS simply because of the default browser, something that can be changed in two minutes time?
You're assuming that the popularity of Windows has something to do with Windows.


I like how Gnome-Terminal lets you put a background image.
If by "image" you mean "a composited RGBA .png", which is uniquely awesome. Occasionally I think that there's something wrong with the world in which I sometimes prefer to do things through the terminal not because it's faster, but because it's prettier, than the alternative. Disableable scrollbar helps, at least back here in 10.10.

whatthefunk
June 15th, 2011, 08:22 AM
You're assuming that the popularity of Windows has something to do with Windows.

Well, the popularity of Windows sure doesnt have anything to do with IE. And does the popularity of Ubunut have anything to do with Chrome? Can you find anybody who switched to Ubuntu because Chrome was the default browser?

Copper Bezel
June 15th, 2011, 08:37 AM
Well, that would be very difficult, as it's never been. I can imagine Chrome being unfamiliar to new users in a way that Firefox isn't simply because Firefox is installed on more machines, Windows and otherwise. It's less about reasons people switch and more about first impressions.

Nyromith
June 15th, 2011, 09:21 AM
I use Chrome but voted for Firefox. Chrome is evil, very evil. Chromium is just a compilation of the source code released by Google as a favor. Firefox has the spirit of Linux in general, so this is the browser I expect to find on Linux installations.

TenPlus1
June 15th, 2011, 10:28 AM
Chromium is the backbone that Google Chrome is built upon but for now it is missing a few key elements that Firefox provides, like memory cache... As for built-in flash, do we really need that considering the "Install 3rd Party Software" is available during the install process ?

Bandit
June 15th, 2011, 12:46 PM
It's all been said already, but I'll recap.

* Firefox is a cross-platform standard. Anyone with any sense has been using it for years regardless of the operating system.

* Firefox is also more broadly compatible with sloppily coded websites in the way that IE is, by forcing developers who can't follow standards to write sloppy code for it, too.

* It's associated with open source development in general - it's the one open source app everyone knows about. It's like Linux brand identity.

* It's very full-featured, extensible, and customizable. It fits a broad cross-section of users' habits.

* It isn't, by default, skinned in a way that makes it look completely alien on an average Linux desktop.

In general, it's the good old FOSS workhorse of web browsing, and it's the last applictation I think Ubuntu should consider switching out for something else on a simple calculus of performance. I'd see Ubuntu phase out Nautilus before Firefox. It's just a good default.

I can uninstall it myself, thanks. = P

That and it also follows the closest to W3C standards make it the best default choice. http://www.w3.org/

I am not saying users shouldnt have an option to change that after the desktop is installed tho.





Chromium is the backbone that Google Chrome is built upon but for now it is missing a few key elements that Firefox provides, like memory cache... As for built-in flash, do we really need that considering the "Install 3rd Party Software" is available during the install process ?
True, plus how hard is it to copy and paste "1" single plug-in file to your /plugins dir in firefox.. It only takes a whole 5secs..
If a said user cant do that, then that same said user doesn't have the technical knowledge to debate why we should or should not use firefox. There are more things to consider then speed on slower machines.

Primefalcon
June 15th, 2011, 01:31 PM
I honestly use Chrome over Firefox, it's a better browser

Primefalcon
June 15th, 2011, 01:39 PM
having said that though, I like the idea of having a browser ballot

Bandit
June 15th, 2011, 01:41 PM
I honestly use Chrome over Firefox, it's a better browser

Explain how its "better".
Just because someone likes something doesn't make it better.

Primefalcon
June 15th, 2011, 02:09 PM
It's faster, lighter, gives you more web page and less browser (granted ff4 fixed this a lot but still...).

it's also more standards compliant that FF in regards tt html5 (even chrome 8 had ff4 beat...)

http://www.marzapower.com/2010/09/15/browser-standards-html5-test-best-results/

good enough?

ivanovnegro
June 15th, 2011, 02:23 PM
It's all been said already, but I'll recap.

* Firefox is a cross-platform standard. Anyone with any sense has been using it for years regardless of the operating system.

* Firefox is also more broadly compatible with sloppily coded websites in the way that IE is, by forcing developers who can't follow standards to write sloppy code for it, too.

* It's associated with open source development in general - it's the one open source app everyone knows about. It's like Linux brand identity.

* It's very full-featured, extensible, and customizable. It fits a broad cross-section of users' habits.

* It isn't, by default, skinned in a way that makes it look completely alien on an average Linux desktop.

In general, it's the good old FOSS workhorse of web browsing, and it's the last applictation I think Ubuntu should consider switching out for something else on a simple calculus of performance. I'd see Ubuntu phase out Nautilus before Firefox. It's just a good default.

I can uninstall it myself, thanks. = P

This.


Thanks for the answers guys! I guess the only thing that I can think of that Chrome/ium has that Firefox 4 doesn't is a slight speed advantage (at least on my machine) ;)
The one thing I really always liked about Firefox was the selection and quality of the extensions available.

Also this.


Half the default programs that come with my OS are dumped first thing after install.

Thats right.




I dont know about that. Windows is the most popular OS in the world and has without question the worst browser as default. Would you pass up on an otherwise brilliant OS simply because of the default browser, something that can be changed in two minutes time?

Eh, Windows is another thing. We are talking here about Ubuntu.


It's lighter,

Never saw why Chrome should be lighter.

Primefalcon
June 15th, 2011, 02:25 PM
This.
Never saw why Chrome should be lighter.
runs better on older slower machines which is a lot of Buntu installs (light on resources) also less time to download if smaller in size (lighter in size)

DinoT1985
June 15th, 2011, 03:07 PM
Fair enough. My work computer is a piece of crud anyway. What platform do you develop on? We us .ASP/C# at work, and I'm not a really big fan.
Mine's more for web design, development and imedia. Basically I constantly upload, download files, write and troubleshoot code and edit movies.

pbpersson
June 15th, 2011, 04:10 PM
I'm definitely hung up on speed and memory use. When FF runs my system into swap (with 4GB of RAM), that's a problem. I can run chromium for weeks without a restart and never hit swap.



I have also had lots of problems with FF and have switched to Chromium. I don't know what web site was doing it but my entire system would become unresponsive and memory usage was through the roof. Those problems went away when I ditched FF.

christoph411
June 15th, 2011, 06:12 PM
having said that though, I like the idea of having a browser ballot

Yeah that's what I thought too, because then everybody wouldn't be imposing their browser preferences and opinions on everybody else! :D

MBybee
June 15th, 2011, 11:16 PM
Yeah that's what I thought too, because then everybody wouldn't be imposing their browser preferences and opinions on everybody else! :D

Ballots work.

Heck, they could even just keep Debian's IceWeasel. Let the users decide.

GWBouge
June 15th, 2011, 11:59 PM
it's also more standards compliant that FF in regards tt html5 (even chrome 8 had ff4 beat...)

http://www.marzapower.com/2010/09/15/browser-standards-html5-test-best-results/

good enough?

Granted, I'll likely be sticking with Firefox anyways, but given this test is about 7 months old, it'd be interesting to see something recent from end-user machines.

Here's what's on my machine, using http://www.html5test.com/ (the test used in that comparison)

Firefox (5.0~b5+build1) - 255 + 9.
Chromium (12.0.742.91~r87961) - 291 + 13
Epiphany (2.30.6-1) - 258 + 14

radar920
June 16th, 2011, 12:15 AM
I use Chrome, not Chromium on Ubuntu. Firefox is just too slow at starting, and just feels sluggish.

Same for me.

Timmer1240
June 16th, 2011, 04:30 AM
I really really like Chromium over Firefox seems faster and I like the interface of it I still have Firefox installed and use it once in a while but Chromiums my favorite browser!

Macskeeball
June 16th, 2011, 07:05 AM
True, plus how hard is it to copy and paste "1" single plug-in file to your /plugins dir in firefox.. It only takes a whole 5secs..
If a said user cant do that, then that same said user doesn't have the technical knowledge to debate why we should or should not use firefox.

That method would require manually keeping the Flash plugin up-to-date. Flash is notorious for its security vulnerabilities. Chrome automatically updates itself in a completely silent way, and when it does so it also updates its built in Flash. Granted, this is more beneficial on platforms like Windows and Mac, which require more micromanaging of 3rd party updates.

Dustin2128
June 16th, 2011, 07:08 AM
Personally firefox owns all for me, but impliment a browser ballot I say! Isn't the freedom to decide what software one uses the core philosophy of linux?

Copper Bezel
June 16th, 2011, 07:35 AM
Chrome automatically updates itself in a completely silent way, and when it does so it also updates its built in Flash.

I agree that updating plugins manually is not something an enduser should ever be expected to do and that this is all irrelevant on Linux with its system-wide automatic updates, but if Chrome is silently and mystically updating itself without my permission, then why do I see updates for Chrome every time I apt-get upgrade?

Macskeeball
June 16th, 2011, 07:39 AM
Hmm, maybe the Linux version doesn't silently auto update because Linux usually has repos. I know from experience though that it does it on Mac and Windows.

Copper Bezel
June 16th, 2011, 07:40 AM
It does in Chrome OS, and naturally Mac, because the system has permission to run updates in that way. Under ordinary desktop Linux, so far as I understand, there's no mechanism for that.

beew
June 16th, 2011, 08:38 AM
your experience, not the same as mine. I've used firefox 4 that was open for 2 days straight in work and the 3rd day it was just as fast.

However with chrome i haven't been able to view a few sites i have bookmarked without occurring problems.

Let them use chrome by default. I'll be removing it on install day and downloading firefox and opera.

+100

beew
June 16th, 2011, 08:42 AM
runs better on older slower machines which is a lot of Buntu installs (light on resources) also less time to download if smaller in size (lighter in size)

Are you kidding me? It appears to be faster because it uses a lot of ram. I have an old machine and FF3.6 is slow but steady. Chromium starts out fast but after about 20 minutes of browsing with a few open tabs it freezes up.

beew
June 16th, 2011, 08:52 AM
+1.

People seem all hung up on the relative speed of their browser these days. I will agree that Chromium based seem to be marginally quicker that Firefox, but speed alone does not make a browser. I have been switching between Chromium and Firefox for a while now and I have to say that, in my opinion, Firefox is by far the better product.

Exactly. Actually FF4 is very fast, except maybe a just a little bit slower on the initial startup (the first time after boot) I don't think the default browser should be decided by a people obviously suffering from ADDH.

Bandit
June 16th, 2011, 02:48 PM
That method would require manually keeping the Flash plugin up-to-date. Flash is notorious for its security vulnerabilities. Chrome automatically updates itself in a completely silent way, and when it does so it also updates its built in Flash. Granted, this is more beneficial on platforms like Windows and Mac, which require more micromanaging of 3rd party updates.

I am not sure how to respond to this, but if someone is THAT LAZY. I mean come on, they dont release an update everyday, its like maybe 1 or 2 times every 6 months. Next argument is that we should do away with keyboards because they require to much work to operate..

scouser73
June 16th, 2011, 04:35 PM
I did vote for chrome, but after having installed chromium and visiting a website that wouldn't work correctly under Chrome but works perfectly under chromium I have changed my mind.

swoll1980
June 16th, 2011, 04:51 PM
There is a big difference between having the option to install proprietary software and having such software installed by default..

You always have an option. I've been alive for awhile, but I've never heard of someone sticking a gun to someone else's head, and forcing them to install proprietary software.

swoll1980
June 16th, 2011, 04:55 PM
Next argument is that we should do away with keyboards because they require to much work to operate..

I think many hardware manufacturers are already making that argument.

nrundy
June 16th, 2011, 08:46 PM
Firefox's long-present memory leak is wreaking havoc on its stability. It's been giving me a lot of problems. I love Mozilla and respect Firefox greatly. But until the memory leak is fixed and Electrolysis is implemented, I'm going to be using Chrome.

I picked Chrome instead of Chromium so that I can get automatic & fast updates of Flash security fixes. Plus I like the PDF reader.

damnated
June 16th, 2011, 09:27 PM
Actually, I never would have thought about this, but with FF4 released, adding Chrome/Chromium would be an improvement. Chrome/Chromium is about 2 times faster than FF4, not just at loading pages, but as an application overall. It also feels lighter, and user friendlier than FF4.

cyberhood
June 16th, 2011, 10:02 PM
Chromium may become the default browser as it is FOSS.

Chrome is proprietary and making it default would be a violation to the Ubuntu philosophy. Chrome will not be the default browser.
Firefox is not quite 100% FOSS; "The Mozilla Corporation owns trademark to the Firefox name and denies the use of the name 'Firefox' to unofficial builds that fall outside certain guidelines." -Wikipedia's source (https://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html)

This is why I use GNU IceCat (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/), which is just Firefox with different non-trademarked icons. I especially like its wide range of add-ons.

I voted "Let the user decide!" which should include a list of FOSS browsers kind of like BrowserChoice.eu (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu).

What's up with M. Shuttleworth and Chrome®? It might have been a misprint; he might have been saying Chromium and they just misquoted him, but I doubt it. I don't get it because in the linked ComputerWorld article (http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390027/chrome_nearly_replaced_firefox_ubuntu_linux_mark_s huttleworth_says/?fp=4&fpid=1968336438) he seemed to be saying that not only was Google® the lesser of the oligarchic IT companies, but he was making it sound like he really adored Google® as a company because of their "don't be evil" propaganda. Chromium's fine, but Google Chrome®? Really? :confused: :disappointed:

Spice Weasel
June 16th, 2011, 10:09 PM
Firefox is not quite 100% FOSS; "The Mozilla Corporation owns trademark to the Firefox name and denies the use of the name 'Firefox' to unofficial builds that fall outside certain guidelines." -Wikipedia's source (https://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html)

This is why I use GNU IceCat (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/), which is just Firefox with different non-trademarked icons. I especially like its wide range of add-ons.

I voted "Let the user decide!" which should include a list of FOSS browsers kind of like BrowserChoice.eu (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu).

What's up with M. Shuttleworth and Chrome®? It might have been a misprint; he might have been saying Chromium and they just misquoted him, but I doubt it. I don't get it because in the linked ComputerWorld article (http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390027/chrome_nearly_replaced_firefox_ubuntu_linux_mark_s huttleworth_says/?fp=4&fpid=1968336438) he seemed to be saying that not only was Google® the lesser of the oligarchic IT companies, but he was making it sound like he really adored Google® as a company because of their "don't be evil" propaganda. Chromium's fine, but Google Chrome®? Really? :confused: :disappointed:

You use Ubuntu, yes? Are you aware of this (http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy)?

chegarty
June 16th, 2011, 10:18 PM
I really like Firefox and I don't think that its memory problems are terrible under normal use. That being said, I use Chromium on a more regular basis. I think it might be a good idea to give the user a choice between FF4 and Chromium upon install because I know people who are extremely partisan when it comes to browsers.

Chrome? Definitely not. For all the work that's been put into open-source browsers, it's not the time to jump ship to something so blatantly proprietary.

Cheers!

forrestcupp
June 16th, 2011, 10:53 PM
What if Canonical can get a kickback from using Chrome by default? It would be very easy to uninstall it and use something else, and it would help support the cause. Shuttleworth dumps a lot more money into it than he gets in return. I don't see anything wrong with something that may have the possibility of harmlessly generating revenue. It may be a misquote, but I don't really see the harm in it if it's not.

cyberhood
June 16th, 2011, 11:15 PM
You use Ubuntu, yes? Are you aware of this (http://www.ubuntu.com/aboutus/trademarkpolicy)?
Yeah, I'm aware of it. I think chose Ubuntu for reasons of easing into the Linux world. Ubuntu seemed like the right choice as it's the distribution most Linux users around me seem to know the most about because it's the most popular at the moment. Plus these forums are extremely helpful and the community is just great, really helpful and positive. I've basically made the switch to Linux solo using just these forums. My plan is once I've learned enough then I will make the switch over to a 100% GNU-Linux distribution (http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html).
The other thing is that I thought M. Shuttleworth was really devoted to FOSS despite Ubuntu's trademark policy, that's somewhat understandable. But if this Google Chrome® stuff is true then I'm really disillusioned. What's wrong with Chromium??
I didn't see any mention of getting funding from Google® in the articles, doesn't mean it won't happen or isn't already... this is all very strange.

speedwell68
June 16th, 2011, 11:18 PM
What if Canonical can get a kickback from using Chrome by default? It would be very easy to uninstall it and use something else, and it would help support the cause. Shuttleworth dumps a lot more money into it than he gets in return. I don't see anything wrong with something that may have the possibility of harmlessly generating revenue. It may be a misquote, but I don't really see the harm in it if it's not.

This.^^^

I couldn't give two figs if a Linux distro comes with proprietary software, especially if the developers are actually earning off it. Just so long as I can use the open source software I like.

itguy1985
June 17th, 2011, 04:54 AM
Firefox is not quite 100% FOSS; "The Mozilla Corporation owns trademark to the Firefox name and denies the use of the name 'Firefox' to unofficial builds that fall outside certain guidelines." -Wikipedia's source (https://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html)

This is why I use GNU IceCat (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/), which is just Firefox with different non-trademarked icons. I especially like its wide range of add-ons.

I voted "Let the user decide!" which should include a list of FOSS browsers kind of like BrowserChoice.eu (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu).

What's up with M. Shuttleworth and Chrome®? It might have been a misprint; he might have been saying Chromium and they just misquoted him, but I doubt it. I don't get it because in the linked ComputerWorld article (http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390027/chrome_nearly_replaced_firefox_ubuntu_linux_mark_s huttleworth_says/?fp=4&fpid=1968336438) he seemed to be saying that not only was Google® the lesser of the oligarchic IT companies, but he was making it sound like he really adored Google® as a company because of their "don't be evil" propaganda. Chromium's fine, but Google Chrome®? Really? :confused: :disappointed:

I never understood this. When I let someone use my car, I don't hand them my license too. Why would keeping your product, and identity separate from those whom you let use your code, be a bad thing, or looked down upon? I think the term freetard usually makes an appearance right about now.

newbie2
June 17th, 2011, 10:25 AM
My plan is once I've learned enough then I will make the switch over to a 100% GNU-Linux distribution (http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html).
Quote from Richard Matthew Stallman(FSF) :

Linus Torvalds originally developed Linux as proprietary software, in 1991. In 1992 he released it under the GNU GPL, and thus, combining Linux with the GNU system became possible as a way of making a completely free operating system.

But he didn't do that because he valued freedom - he had other motives. I'm not completely sure what they were. And then in 1996, he began inserting pieces of non-free software into Linux - the binary blobs for firmware.

When we at the FSF found out about this, we started campaigning for something to be done about it - that was several years ago. We started pushing for the free distributions of GNU/Linux to get rid of the blobs. And then Alexandre Oliva started distributing Linux-libre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux-libre), which is Linux with the blobs deleted.
http://www.techradar.com/news/software/-proprietary-software-keeps-users-helpless--963248
:p

User3k
June 17th, 2011, 10:35 AM
I have multiple tabs open most of the time using Chromium for very long periods at a time. Listening to music, surfing the web, browsing this and other forums, etc. I don't have any problems with it freezing on me. I love Chromium, I love Firefox, don't trust Chrome, never got use to Opera and I love Internet Explorer..... Sorry, a momentary lapse of sanity. I feel better now.

alexfish
June 17th, 2011, 11:58 AM
For me a browser is a browser , but if had a choice to have any browser at default it would seem sensible to have one that takes up less space on the live cd and make more room for kernel tweaks, once connected
it is an easy matter to download the browser of your choice.

However have found this article on ZDnet possible worth debating here , seems to relate to WEBGL
used by Chrome and Firefox.

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/security-threats/2011/06/17/microsoft-rates-webgl-as-harmful-40093134/

alexfish

Swagman
June 17th, 2011, 01:08 PM
My Wife and I both use Facebook a lot so to save logging in & out we both use different browsers.

I use Firefox and my wife uses Epiphany. We tried Opera but that does some weird stuff to the layout in FB games.

She has said that occasionally Epiphany closes for no reason so just before work last night (I work nights) I installed Chromium from the Software Centre and went to work.

I asked her this morning how she got on with it and she said "It's crap, none of my FB games work, it says something about a crashed plugin"

SO I looked myself and yup, any site that requires flash instantly crashes the plugin. As flash works on ALL the other browsers we use that'll be an EPIC PHAIL then.

Bye bye Chromium.

nrundy
June 17th, 2011, 01:38 PM
Firefox is not quite 100% FOSS; "The Mozilla Corporation owns trademark to the Firefox name and denies the use of the name 'Firefox' to unofficial builds that fall outside certain guidelines." -Wikipedia's source (https://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/policy.html)

This is why I use GNU IceCat (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/), which is just Firefox with different non-trademarked icons. I especially like its wide range of add-ons.

I voted "Let the user decide!" which should include a list of FOSS browsers kind of like BrowserChoice.eu (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu).

What's up with M. Shuttleworth and Chrome®? It might have been a misprint; he might have been saying Chromium and they just misquoted him, but I doubt it. I don't get it because in the linked ComputerWorld article (http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/390027/chrome_nearly_replaced_firefox_ubuntu_linux_mark_s huttleworth_says/?fp=4&fpid=1968336438) he seemed to be saying that not only was Google® the lesser of the oligarchic IT companies, but he was making it sound like he really adored Google® as a company because of their "don't be evil" propaganda. Chromium's fine, but Google Chrome®? Really? :confused: :disappointed:

I think Google deserves a lot of credit here. A great example of Google's initiative/thinking is how they integrated Flash so that it receives automatic updates. This makes the user's life so much easier and dramatically improves the user's security. These are the kind of things that are drawing people to switch to Chrome.

nrundy
June 17th, 2011, 01:42 PM
What if Canonical can get a kickback from using Chrome by default? It would be very easy to uninstall it and use something else, and it would help support the cause. Shuttleworth dumps a lot more money into it than he gets in return. I don't see anything wrong with something that may have the possibility of harmlessly generating revenue. It may be a misquote, but I don't really see the harm in it if it's not.

+1

In the article, Shuttleworth supports his decision by explaining how Chrome runs better on Linux. I'm all for supporting software that makes great strides to run well on Linux. And if it financially helps Ubuntu, this is a positive. I trust Shuttleworth to make the best decision for ubuntu.

Besides, anyone who still wants Firefox can easily install it. No biggie!

Ric_NYC
June 17th, 2011, 04:49 PM
Chrome/Chromium.


Google is a big supporter of the Open Source movement.

ivanovnegro
June 17th, 2011, 05:20 PM
My Wife and I both use Facebook a lot so to save logging in & out we both use different browsers.

I use Firefox and my wife uses Epiphany. We tried Opera but that does some weird stuff to the layout in FB games.

She has said that occasionally Epiphany closes for no reason so just before work last night (I work nights) I installed Chromium from the Software Centre and went to work.

I asked her this morning how she got on with it and she said "It's crap, none of my FB games work, it says something about a crashed plugin"

SO I looked myself and yup, any site that requires flash instantly crashes the plugin. As flash works on ALL the other browsers we use that'll be an EPIC PHAIL then.

Bye bye Chromium.

My girl friend is playing the Facebook games under Chromium without a problem, something has to be wrong with your setup.





Google is a big supporter of the Open Source movement.

I am not sure about this, but I am sure that Google is a big supporter of his own and to make many many many money.

And this in general, Chromium still is Google's, right? So, if somebody somehow does not trust so much this company, you are still using a Google product IMHO, the base to make Chrome.

Frogs Hair
June 17th, 2011, 05:36 PM
If I don't like it I will remove it , I have had no interest in trying Chrome/Chromium so far , but I will give it a try .

Zero2Nine
June 17th, 2011, 06:06 PM
Chrome/Chromium.


Google is a big supporter of the Open Source movement.

And Mozilla isn't? I agree that Google is doing good stuff for the Open Source movement but it does not stand as an argument against FireFox.

Bandit
June 17th, 2011, 07:26 PM
And Mozilla isn't? I agree that Google is doing good stuff for the Open Source movement but it does not stand as an argument against FireFox.

Google may be supporting Open Source, but their motives are like any other company in the world. Make Money doing something. So as long as it makes a profit for them I am sure they will keep using it, which is more then likely why they started using Open Source software to start with, most of it was already developed for them. They just had to add their twist and poof.. instant profit.

forrestcupp
June 17th, 2011, 07:36 PM
And Mozilla isn't? I agree that Google is doing good stuff for the Open Source movement but it does not stand as an argument against FireFox.

I think that is not an argument against Firefox, but an argument against those who are against Google.

tjeremiah
June 17th, 2011, 08:57 PM
My girl friend is playing the Facebook games under Chromium without a problem, something has to be wrong with your setup.



I am not sure about this, but I am sure that Google is a big supporter of his own and to make many many many money.

And this in general, Chromium still is Google's, right? So, if somebody somehow does not trust so much this company, you are still using a Google product IMHO, the base to make Chrome.

Oh, i thought someone else makes Chromium and google takes it, rebrand, and release it to the public.

User3k
June 17th, 2011, 09:10 PM
My understanding is this. Chromium can be considered that "unstable" branch (even though it seems pretty stable to me,) Chrome is the stable branch. Also From my understanding Chrome, by default, phones home a lot to Google, chromium by default doesn't. In all fairness though I believe you can stop Chrome from doing all of that.

Also Chrome comes with things like flash, etc, all set to go. Chromium comes with very little and the user has to set these things up.

In all fairness if Ubuntu changed it would want something in the stable category, which would be Chrome.

Also I know what Chromium is considered but honestly it has always worked well and has been stable for me. So I am not sure what is meant by "unstable."

ivanovnegro
June 17th, 2011, 09:19 PM
In all fairness if Ubuntu changed it would want something in the stable category, which would be Chrome.


I think so. Why to support a "half" product? I know Chromium is indeed stable and absoluteley usable but I admit that Chromium has sometimes some little annoyances not openening a specific site etc. IMHO Chrome is the end product/for end users.
I do not use them anyway and I prefer also more to use true Open Source apps just like FF but if I would go for Chrome/ium I would pick up now Chrome.

Legendary_Bibo
June 18th, 2011, 04:05 AM
I just don't understand why everyone has to go up in arms with every minor change. There's going to be changes between distros, if there wasn't then what's the point of saying you have a new distro?

Why can't we hear news about a new version of a distro without going it a tizzy of the default applications?

cyberhood
June 18th, 2011, 11:30 AM
I never understood this. When I let someone use my car, I don't hand them my license too. Why would keeping your product, and identity separate from those whom you let use your code, be a bad thing, or looked down upon? I think the term freetard usually makes an appearance right about now.
The fundamental question isn't about use -or abuse for that matter- of code. It's a question of principle. Is Ubuntu committed to FOSS (http://www.ubuntu.com/project/about-ubuntu/our-philosophy), or is it not? Trademarking a logo or name is one thing, getting in bed a rising monopoly that's going very much in the direction of Microsoft® is quite another. Google® is the new reigning king in the IT world. The difference between Google® & Microsoft® being that the former have much more data mining (aka: sophisticated Orwellian spying (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Total_Information_Awareness)) capabilities than the latter ever had. They seem to be swallowing up any IT technology/service that pops up. One of the many reasons I chose to use Linux was exactly this, not to be swallowed up by one of these oligarchs. Plurality and diversity is positive. Plus, as someone just posted, all a corporation is legally designed to worry about is increasing shareholder profits. Caring about customer security/privacy is secondary to that motive and maybe even superficial (eg. "don't be evil" propaganda) as the legal mandate is to conceitedly increase dividends, period. IMO, that's reason enough not to trust them with my car. I think the term shill usually makes an appearance right about now.

RoflHaxBbq
June 18th, 2011, 11:45 AM
Despite me not using Ubuntu and hating on Chrome, I actually think it would be beneficial to the progression of Ubuntu as a popular distribution.

Chrome has been really gaining a huge following recently which is overtaking Firefox.
I do, however, think that at install time, the user should be able to pick which browser they want from FF, Chromium, or both. I do not think Chrome should be included because I think that Chromium better represents the values of Ubuntu and the Linux community.

digital_k
June 18th, 2011, 12:15 PM
I personally use and prefer Chromium. It has the goodness of Chrome w/o the things added by Google that I don't care for. Rock solid and not as heavy as Fx has become.

I would love to see it as the default browser in future Ubuntu releases. :D