Is an Ubuntu only browser possible?

[daz4126]

Hi everybody,

I really like Firefox, but feel that it is increasingly becoming bloated. I was wondering that since it is open source, how difficult would it be to create a fork project that focused on a clean, lightweight browswer that was specifically for Ubuntu - like Camino is for mac OS?

I know iceweasel started up, but this was just a rebranded firefox. This sort of thing is way beyond me, I was just wondering if it was possible and if anybody had the know how and inclination.

cheers,

DAZ

[Adamant1988]

Hi everybody,

I really like Firefox, but feel that it is increasingly becoming bloated. I was wondering that since it is open source, how difficult would it be to create a fork project that focused on a clean, lightweight browswer that was specifically for Ubuntu - like Camino is for mac OS?

I know iceweasel started up, but this was just a rebranded firefox. This sort of thing is way beyond me, I was just wondering if it was possible and if anybody had the know how and inclination.

cheers,

DAZ

You might like Opera. It's very feature rich, and very fast. however, it's closed source, so if that's not your thing you should shy away from it.

[~LoKe]

You might like Opera. It's very feature rich, and very fast. however, it's closed source, so if that's not your thing you should shy away from it.
He said clean and lightweight, and you suggested the exact opposite.

OP, look into Swiftfox.

[mykalreborn]

i supose it's possible, but it's kind of useless. but an ubuntu only browser would not only be a little against the ubuntu philosophy, but it would be like reinventing the wheel. firefox is the best browser out there, so why should we invent another one.
a gui only for ubuntu... now that would be something else. but something better than the ubuntu themes you get on addons.mozilla.com.
plus, now with the release of firefox 2.0.2 you must have seen that it's much faster in terms of cpu resources.

[daz4126]

I will check out swiftfox, but from what I've seen it is just an optimised version of firefox. I was thinking more ambitious, proper code fork with no going back. something that was clean to look at as well - hardly any menu bars and buttons and fully integrated into gtk. Something that gnome ubuntu users could call their own, like konqueror in kde. Is this just too much?

DAZ

[daz4126]

i supose it's possible, but it's kind of useless. but an ubuntu only browser would not only be a little against the ubuntu philosophy, but it would be like reinventing the wheel.

I didn't mean literally ubuntu only. More that is was designed specifically to integrate into ubuntu and for ubuntu. Obviously it could and should be available for any distro or os.

DAZ

[matthew]

You might try Epiphany (http://www.gnome.org/projects/epiphany/).
sudo apt-get install epiphany-browser

[23meg]

I will check out swiftfox, but from what I've seen it is just an optimised version of firefox. I was thinking more ambitious, proper code fork with no going back. something that was clean to look at as well - hardly any menu bars and buttons and fully integrated into gtk. Something that gnome ubuntu users could call their own, like konqueror in kde. Is this just too much?

DAZ

It sounds to me like you're looking for something that exists: Epiphany.

[Brunellus]

You might try Epiphany (http://www.gnome.org/projects/epiphany/).
sudo apt-get install epiphany-browser
or Kazehakase (http://kazehakase.sourceforge.jp/)

[SunnyRabbiera]

Its possible, but it would not fit the philosophy of ubuntu.
I mean someone could build a modded mozilla or konqueror very easy and put it in the spotlight, but I think that we would share this modded browser.
Me personally I really like to see a modded konqueror for ubuntu, I like konq but hate having to install KDE to get it working.

[Peepsalot]

For a lightweight browser, try elinks :lolflag:

[Brunellus]

For a lightweight browser, try elinks :lolflag:
I prefer lynx. elinks just annoys me.

[Erik Trybom]

Having a specific Ubuntu browser is nothing to wish for in my opinion. Firefox is a well-known name and a lot of people who turn to Linux already use it on Windows. Most people like it. In fact, the Ubuntu people actively worked to solve the naming issue so they didn't have to rename it Iceweasel.

Furthermore, being lightweight has never been one of Ubuntu's goals. Other distributions do that better.

[daz4126]

Having a specific Ubuntu browser is nothing to wish for in my opinion. Firefox is a well-known name and a lot of people who turn to Linux already use it on Windows. Most people like it. In fact, the Ubuntu people actively worked to solve the naming issue so they didn't have to rename it Iceweasel.

Furthermore, being lightweight has never been one of Ubuntu's goals. Other distributions do that better.

These are good points. Firefox on Windows played a large part in converting me to Ubuntu. Maybe I pushed the 'Ubuntu specific' point too much, but it wasn't intended to mean 'exclusive' just developed for the users of ubuntu first and foremost.

some people have mentioned it is not needed and backed this up with some good points. But on mac, most people will opt to use camino over firefox because it is more mac-like. I think that was the idea I was thinking of.

And I definitely didn't mean text-based when I said lightweight.

DAZ

[SunnyRabbiera]

well this is why I would like a KHTML type browser buolt for gnome as I peronally find KHTML lighter then mozillas gecko

[FernandoMilton]

I prefer lynx. elinks just annoys me.

You guys are not hardcore. In my time, we have to telnet our "GET / HTTP/1.1" by hand and render the resulting html in our heads. In the snow. Barefoot. Uphill both ways. Carrying a bucket of water. :D

[Brunellus]

You guys are not hardcore. In my time, we have to telnet our "GET / HTTP/1.1" by hand and render the resulting html in our heads. Uphill both ways. In the snow. Barefoot. Carrying a bucket of water. :D
netcat ftw.

[Sammi]

Wasn't there a big discussion about making Epiphany the default browser in Ubuntu instead of Firefox. How did that end?

[Brunellus]

Wasn't there a big discussion about making Epiphany the default browser in Ubuntu instead of Firefox. How did that end?
it ended on the side of Firefox.

[23meg]

Wasn't there a big discussion about making Epiphany the default browser in Ubuntu instead of Firefox. How did that end?

End? It never ends. It and the Thunderbird vs. Evolution one are the fixtures of every development release forum.

[Peepsalot]

I prefer lynx. elinks just annoys me.
I made the decision a whlie ago for elinks to be my textmode browser of choice, almost solely based on the table at the end of this article: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8148. It has the most "Y"s :D.

Though, I suppose that means it is more bloated than Lynx. ;-)

[daz4126]

End? It never ends. It and the Thunderbird vs. Evolution one are the fixtures of every development release forum.

If it's Firefox then surely Thunderbird would be a better companion?

DAZ

[Sammi]

it ended on the side of Firefox.You know strangly enough I guessed that myself. Maybe because we still have Firefox as the default one... hmmmm...

What I really was asking was how people came to the conclusion that Firefox should be kept as the default browser. What does Firefox have that Epiphany doesn't and vice versa?



EDIT: I just found this tread on the subject: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=93219 (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=93219&highlight=epihany+firefox)

Poll from the tread:
Question: What do Ubuntu users feel should be the default web browser in Dapper?
epiphany 430 26.20%
firefox 1120 68.25%
opera 91 5.55%

[23meg]

If it's Firefox then surely Thunderbird would be a better companion?

Not necessarily; there are many arguments in favor of Evolution. Do a search and browse through the discussions if you're curious.

[daz4126]

Not necessarily; there are many arguments in favor of Evolution. Do a search and browse through the discussions if you're curious.

I don't actually use email clients - I prefer online apps such gmail and google calendar. My 'dream browser' (which, by the way, nobody has expressed any desire to build yet!!) would be great if it incorporated some integration of these apps (although it is pretty much possible with firefox extensions already).

DAZ

[daz4126]

Going back to the subject of firefox bloat. Do people not think that with each release it is getting more and more 'built in' stuff (for example spell checking, rss stuff) that is making it more of a memory hog. I'm not saying these are bad things (I love the spell checking), but would it not be better to keep as much as possible as extensions so people could keep it as lean or bloated as they liked?

DAZ

[daz4126]

In fact, I love the idea of extensions so much, that any 'new' browswer would have to be based on Firefox and completely compatible with its extensions.

DAZ

[moore.bryan]

throwing in two cents...

firefox does seem to be more bloated, swiftfox didn't move significantly faster for me, and i'm convinced epiphany is a pos (not trying to look for fire, just don't like it).

anything like k-meleon for ubuntu?

[daz4126]

throwing in two cents...

firefox does seem to be more bloated, swiftfox didn't move significantly faster for me, and i'm convinced epiphany is a pos (not trying to look for fire, just don't like it).

anything like k-meleon for ubuntu?


what's a pos??

[Peepsalot]

POS = Piece of ...crap

[daz4126]

Thanks....how naive of me!!

[daz4126]

throwing in two cents...

firefox does seem to be more bloated, swiftfox didn't move significantly faster for me, and i'm convinced epiphany is a pos (not trying to look for fire, just don't like it).

anything like k-meleon for ubuntu?



okaaay, now i've established what pos means I can really get on board with this comment. similar feelings inspired my initial post. I just feel that there is a gap for a lighter, nice looking firefox derivative.

DAZ

[Nikron]

I would suggest Opera... Though, I personally despise Opera's look and feel and the fact it is closed source. Does it still come with built in ads?

[SunnyRabbiera]

Nope, thank goodness.
Opera is getting better.

[picpak]

Strangely enough, the original Mozilla, for me, is faster than Firefox.

Haven't tried Seamonkey though.

[imagine]

Opera has no ads anymore since summer 2005...

[moore.bryan]

seamonkey's an interesting idea, but is a huge resource hog, as is opera. i think many in this thread are looking for a super light-weight graphical browser... sorry dillo, lynx, etc...

[frodon]

I use Epiphany for web browsing because i never saw a brother faster than Epiphany then when i have some specific needs like some special video streemings i use firefox.
For me it's 90% Epiphany and 10% Firefox and i have all i need ;)

[Somenoob]

Swiftfox and Konqueror.

[Colonel Kilkenny]

seamonkey's an interesting idea, but is a huge resource hog, as is opera. i think many in this thread are looking for a super light-weight graphical browser... sorry dillo, lynx, etc...

If Opera is resource hog, I'm a walrus. Opera uses core which works on very large variety of platforms and it definately isn't a resource hog.
Of course (it has some elements (like email with large amount of mail or big cache/history) which can make it a little bit slower or take a little bit more of resources) if you compare it to lynx then Opera is a resource hog.

Personally I have no clue why Gecko-based browsers are so popular. Gecko is after all pretty much mediocre rendering engine and at least I have a pretty nasty feeling about Gecko's codebase. The MiniMozilla-project died (probably because Gecko is not so lightweight and the project didn't find enough developers), Firefox hype seems to be slowing down feat. all the profile-problems and stuff.
KHTML (Konqueror) and Presto (Opera) seems to be going forward at high speed. KHTML already has developed css3-selectors and Opera hasn't yet enabled them but has them coded. Opera continues to push browser to every platform. Konqueror is landing on Windows.

The thing is that today the web is so complicated thing that it may not be possible to create really lightweight browser which supports plugins and standards. And if it could be done I really doubt that it would be based on Gecko.

But these are all my biased opinions :)
I really love Opera and even though I don't use much Konqueror I must say that it is for me way better browser than Firefox (of course, if you want to stuff you browser full of "mandatory" and "can't live without" extensions then Firefox is the way to go).

[Brunellus]

seamonkey's an interesting idea, but is a huge resource hog, as is opera. i think many in this thread are looking for a super light-weight graphical browser... sorry dillo, lynx, etc...
Kazehakase seems to be halfway between Firefox/Epiphany and Dillo. I like it.

Atlantis (http://www.akcaagac.com/index_atlantis.html) looks promising, but it's still in pre-alpha. I couldn't get it to build.

[BarfBag]

Give Opera a try. It loads pages quickly and has a very smooth interface. It's certainly not lightweight, though. In my experiences, it tends to hog even more RAM then Firefox.

If you use KDE (or even if you don't - but it won't be as good), Konqueror is a MUST TRY! It's web browsing abilities often get overlooked. Without a doubt, it's the best web browser.

Epiphany is almost as good as Konqueror, but it's not quite there yet. If you use Gnome, this is a good option.

[mykalreborn]

firefox has gotten lighter after the 2.0.2 release. i know it sounds like something that's too hard to notice, but it really is a big difference from the previous version in term of resources. at least on my ubuntu. :D

[moore.bryan]

it seems to keep going back on which engine renders best and which browser is better... which is the best, low-resource browser in ubuntu?

[Brunellus]

it seems to keep going back on which engine renders best and which browser is better... which is the best, low-resource browser in ubuntu?
there's no free lunch. Browsers live on a continuum of lightness and features.



lynx > elinks >>>links2 >>>>>>>Dillo>>(Atlantis)>>>Kazehakase>>>>Epiphany>>>Firefox>>>Konqueror



browsers on the extreme left are textmode only; links2 has an X mode. Dillo is superlightweight for a graphical browser. Atlantis is still in pre-alpha, but seems promising. Then, to the right, is the spectrum of gecko-engined browsers: Kazehakase (which in feisty and greater, should pull only libxul as a dependency), Epiphany (the GNOME browser) and Firefox (and all its derivatives: Seamonkey, Iceweasel, Flock, and so forth). On the extreme right is Konqueror--probably the most feature-heavy browser of them all.

Pick a spot on the continuum that fits your needs best.

[moore.bryan]

i wouldn't put epiphany as lighter than firefox... on my system, it's significantly slower and takes "forever" to load a page. i "tested" on cnn.com:
epiphany: 4.76 seconds
firefox: 2.33 seconds

[tbodine]

Ask your local repository about links/lynx/w3m -- they're very light weight.
Else try Dillo if you want something graphical..
And yes, an Ubuntu-only browser would be against what Ubuntu stands for, it would be stupid anyways, you can theme Firefox to look like Ubuntu if you want though..

[K.Mandla]

Kazehakase ftw!