Use Iceweasel not Firefox

[creeco]

I just wanted to get your peoples opinion on theese questions. Do you use iceweasel if YES then please tell me/the ones who like to know why. If you stick with firefox do not hesiatate telling us why you do.

Personally i prefer iceweasel because it lets people use their own logo for their browser, and if you say youre OPEN SOURCE you have to be it 100% and not 99%.

[Tuna-Fish]

Swiftweasel ftw.

[creeco]

Swiftweasel ftw.

Swiftweasel is still a too small project for me.

[cyclefiend2000]

perhaps if iceweasel were a cross platform app, i might consider using it.

[creeco]

perhaps if iceweasel were a cross platform app, i might consider using it.

It could be, but it is still to new and too small for that. Currently it only works on linux and maybe BSD (correct me if i am wrong.)

[n3tfury]

I just wanted to get your peoples opinion on theese questions. Do you use iceweasel if YES then please tell me/the ones who like to know why. If you stick with firefox do not hesiatate telling us why you do.

Personally i prefer iceweasel because it lets people use their own logo for their browser, and if you say youre OPEN SOURCE you have to be it 100% and not 99%.

so because you can use your own logo, that makes it better? am i missing something here?

[glupee]

Swiftweasel ftw.
+1

[n3tfury]

Swiftweasel is still a too small project for me.


perhaps if iceweasel were a cross platform app, i might consider using it.


It could be, but it is still to new and too small for that. Currently it only works on linux and maybe BSD (correct me if i am wrong.)

L
O
L

[creeco]

so because you can use your own logo, that makes it better? am i missing something here?

No, you just didn't understand what i wrote.. I use Iceweasel because firefox says theyre fully open source/GPL, but all the time they are actually lying.

[n3tfury]

No, you just didn't understand what i wrote.. I use Iceweasel because firefox says theyre fully open source/GPL, but all the time they are actually lying.

chip on shoulder alert.

[bruce89]

No, you just didn't understand what i wrote.. I use Iceweasel because firefox says theyre fully open source/GPL, but all the time they are actually lying.

It isn't GPL, Firefox is MPL, LGPL and GPL at the same time.

[p_quarles]

No, you just didn't understand what i wrote.. I use Iceweasel because firefox says theyre fully open source/GPL, but all the time they are actually lying.
Source code for Firefox 2.0.0.9:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/2.0.0.9/source

[zeDuffMan]

Source code for Firefox 2.0.0.9:
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/2.0.0.9/source

He's referring to the logo. It has some kind of protection on it which the open source community doesn't like.

Personally I don't actually care and am perfectly happy using Firefox.

[cyclefiend2000]

i have to be honest and say that open source doesnt really matter to me... just has to be free and usable. for a browser i want something that is cross platform and has adblocking, pop-up blocking, and flashblocking.

i am not a programmer, so what the heck would i do with the code anyways?

[p_quarles]

He's referring to the logo. It has some kind of protection on it which the open source community doesn't like.

Personally I don't actually care and am perfectly happy using Firefox.
Yeah, I know. I was just pointing out that the logo has nothing to do with the source code. If Mozilla's source code weren't open, we wouldn't have Iceweasel and the other Debian fork projects.

[Sunnz]

They just don't let you use THEIR logo, you CAN use whatever logo you have permission to use. I don't see it a problem as an end user, it is the distrubutor who needs to even know this stuff.

[Nano Geek]

He's referring to the logo. It has some kind of protection on it which the open source community doesn't like.

Personally I don't actually care and am perfectly happy using Firefox. Ubuntu has a trademark on their logo to. They don't want people to create another OS and call it Ubuntu with the Ubuntu logo without permission. As long as the actual software is Open-Source, then I'm fine with it.

[bruce89]

Firefox demands that only Mozilla approved patches are allowed to be applied. This is why the Ubuntu-specific Firefox modifications have been put in a seperate package (ubufox).

This behaviour is ridiculous.

[creeco]

Sorry if i didn't express myself clearly enough, what i really meant were that if you call a program fully free you should not restrict it.

[songshu]

Sorry if i didn't express myself clearly enough, what i really meant were that if you call a program fully free you should not restrict it.

nobody calls it fully free, cause it isn't, at least as far as the logo goes

[bruce89]

nobody calls it fully free, cause it isn't, at least as far as the logo goes

Gobuntu is very bad because of this.

[creeco]

nobody calls it fully free, cause it isn't, at least as far as the logo goes

Theese people do http://download-firefox.org/spread-firefox/23/

And actually it is not only the logo "it is wrong with" serveral elements are restricted by the EULA, including the trademarked Firefox name, artwork, and the proprietary Talkback crash reporter

[igknighted]

For all practical purposes, all of these are the same. Swiftfox/weasel and Firefox/weasel are all the same code, with some minor patches applied, and some minor differences in the compiler settings.

People who say "iceweasel isn't cross platform" and won't use it because of extensions are being foolish, because you can use the same firefox extensions because, gasp, they are the same program.

To the same extent, those who don't use firefox are going quite a bit overboard with FOSS kool-aid. Mozilla is there in principle, and if you sit down and think about WHY their policy on their logo is what it is, then it makes sense. I also understand why Debian needs to re-brand it as iceweasel due to its own rules. But this is not an indictment of Mozilla's open-source philosophy, just a grey area where the rules of two organizations dont mesh well. So they solved it and move on. No need for others to extend the fight to places it doesn't belong.

[bruce89]

Use Iceweasel not Firefox

Epiphany with WebKit more like.

[creeco]

For all practical purposes, all of these are the same. Swiftfox/weasel and Firefox/weasel are all the same code, with some minor patches applied, and some minor differences in the compiler settings.

People who say "iceweasel isn't cross platform" and won't use it because of extensions are being foolish, because you can use the same firefox extensions because, gasp, they are the same program.

To the same extent, those who don't use firefox are going quite a bit overboard with FOSS kool-aid. Mozilla is there in principle, and if you sit down and think about WHY their policy on their logo is what it is, then it makes sense. I also understand why Debian needs to re-brand it as iceweasel due to its own rules. But this is not an indictment of Mozilla's open-source philosophy, just a grey area where the rules of two organizations dont mesh well. So they solved it and move on. No need for others to extend the fight to places it doesn't belong.

We are not discussing pratical purposes, the reason I dont use firefox is because i believe that their philosophy it is ethically wrong

[songshu]

Theese people do http://download-firefox.org/spread-firefox/23/

And actually it is not only the logo "it is wrong with" serveral elements are restricted by the EULA, including the trademarked Firefox name, artwork, and the proprietary Talkback crash reporter

http://download-firefox.org/about-us/

you mean this guy, Bill McIntosh, who is he?

you are right about the other parts as well, but i would not call it wrong, everybody can publish their work under the license they choose, and i would not call everything not GPL "wrong" , sorry to say but the reason that Linux is pretty usable nowadays is mainly thanks to the commercial company's and paid profesionals and not the 4 eyed enthusiast hacking away at night in his little room...

not even RMS himself ever said you would be getting free beer.

[igknighted]

We are not discussing pratical purposes, the reason I dont use firefox is because i believe that their philosophy it is ethically wrong

Why. I have read the literature, and completely agree with mozilla's stance on their name and logo. I haven't heard anything about their crash feedback tool, so please describe what is wrong with that.

[creeco]

http://download-firefox.org/about-us/

you mean this guy, Bill McIntosh, who is he?

you are right about the other parts as well, but i would not call it wrong, everybody can publish their work under the license they choose, and i would not call everything not GPL "wrong" , sorry to say but the reason that Linux is pretty usable nowadays is mainly thanks to the commercial company's and paid profesionals and not the 4 eyed enthusiast hacking away at night in his little room...

not even RMS himself ever said you would be getting free beer.

I agree with you on the reason why linux is usable. But i still think that the way FF advertises for themselves they make it sound like their software is completely free.

[Seisen]

Launchpad isn't open source either so we better quit using that too.:lolflag:

[creeco]

Launchpad isn't open source either so we better quit using that too.:lolflag: Launchpad doesn't make people think they are either... like firefox!

[Six_Digits]

Completely open or not, I find FF is a great browser even if Mozilla has some sort of licensed agreement with firefox.


Mozilla is there in principle, and if you sit down and think about WHY their policy on their logo is what it is, then it makes sense. I also understand why Debian needs to re-brand it as iceweasel due to its own rules. But this is not an indictment of Mozilla's open-source philosophy, just a grey area where the rules of two organizations dont mesh well. So they solved it and move on. No need for others to extend the fight to places it doesn't belong.

[songshu]

I agree with you on the reason why linux is usable. But i still think that the way FF advertises for themselves they make it sound like their software is completely free.

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/about/licensing.html

seems clear and straight to the point to me

[Rhapsody]

Mozilla's position seems perfectly sensible to me.

The Firefox source code is definitely free, being under the MPL, GPL, and LGPL. You can use it under any or all of those licences.

The Firefox name and logo are trademarked though, and any binaries using them fall under the Firefox EULA (http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/legal/eula/firefox2-en.html) (which seems quite reasonable to me).

Mozilla also say that you can't just make modifications to Firefox, then use the Firefox trademarks without the modifications first being approved by Mozilla. I can see why as well, since there could just be chaos otherwise. How would users know which Firefox was the official one?

If you want to use the code without being restricted by Mozilla's trademarks, then you don't use any of their trademarks, like Debian did with Iceweasel.

Since the code itself is perfectly free and the Firefox EULA doesn't contain anything I can't live with, I use the official Mozilla binaries. I see no good reason not to.

[init1]

I use Iceweasel, but only because it's in the Debian repos.

[cyclefiend2000]

For all practical purposes, all of these are the same. Swiftfox/weasel and Firefox/weasel are all the same code, with some minor patches applied, and some minor differences in the compiler settings.

People who say "iceweasel isn't cross platform" and won't use it because of extensions are being foolish, because you can use the same firefox extensions because, gasp, they are the same program.


if firefox and iceweasel are the same then why even have this discussion.

i never heard of iceweasel until recently. did not know it was an option, and dont really know what it can or cant do (other than surf the web).

i know firefox. i have been using it since the firebird releases. i can install it on my windows machine, mac, and linux and use the same extensions on each. if a better browser is available that can accomplish those tasks, i would certainly try it.

[songshu]

if firefox and iceweasel are the same then why even have this discussion.

i never heard of iceweasel until recently. did not know it was an option, and dont really know what it can or cant do (other than surf the web).

i know firefox. i have been using it since the firebird releases. i can install it on my windows machine, mac, and linux and use the same extensions on each. if a better browser is available that can accomplish those tasks, i would certainly try it.
iceweasel is simply the debian package for firefox, just like icedove and thunderbird, besides the icon and the name they are exactley the same....it is simply that Debian does not allow any non-free things in the main distribution and firefox does not accept that Debian uses a different icon with the firefox name together (remember the blue icon?? it was also in ubuntu some time ago)

this whole discussion is about....actually nothing

[igknighted]

if firefox and iceweasel are the same then why even have this discussion.

i never heard of iceweasel until recently. did not know it was an option, and dont really know what it can or cant do (other than surf the web).

i know firefox. i have been using it since the firebird releases. i can install it on my windows machine, mac, and linux and use the same extensions on each. if a better browser is available that can accomplish those tasks, i would certainly try it.

See? No difference. If you used Debian, you would be using Iceweasel, but you would have your same extensions and themes, and you probably wouldn't even know it was a different browser aside from the name. There are a couple patches that Debian applies that integrate it better into Debian. It isn't called Firefox because Mozilla says that the patches change the code, so it is not firefox. As far as the end user is concerned, it is firefox.

Swiftfox and SwiftWeasel are the exact same program as Firefox and IceWeasel, respectively. They are simply compiled with optimizations for each processor. I believe they are also compiled without support for Pango, which IIRC is a library for supporting some lesser-used international text characters. By dropping this support it speeds the browser.

[Blutack]

+1 for Firefox

If anyone could mess about with FF and release it using the official artwork under the FF name it opens up a whole barrel of worms. Everything ranging from the occasional crash because of some crap speed patch up to full blown trojans - esp when you consider firefox is configured to run right through firewalls. Personally I like the way the problem was addressed in Gutsy - an add-on containing all the ubuntu specific changes. If there is something you don't like in FF and want changed you CAN post a patch after all - if that patch is rejected maybe it is rejected for a reason.

[Blutack]

BTW, while we are on the subject of GPL, does anyone know why ubuntuforums uses vBulletin?

[igknighted]

BTW, while we are on the subject of GPL, does anyone know why ubuntuforums uses vBulletin?

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=176622

[Blutack]

Fair enough, should really have searched. Don't blame them, without vBulletin phpbb wouldn't have something to try and beat. Thanks!

[jinx099]

Theres a 15 year old FLOSS Nazi. WOW!!

Seriously, who cares. If you care that much you should be using Debian instead of Ubuntu.

[bruce89]

Mozilla are on the way out, WebKit for First Minister.

[Folk Theory]

umm...what exactly is IceWeasel?

[inversekinetix]

We are not discussing pratical purposes, the reason I dont use firefox is because i believe that their philosophy it is ethically wrong



Is that a link to an open source ethically correct philosophy version of MSN i see in your info?

[SomeGuyDude]

Mozilla are on the way out, WebKit for First Minister.

Soon as I can put Greasemonkey on such a browser, I'm in.

[bruce89]

Soon as I can put Greasemonkey on such a browser, I'm in.

It isn't a browser, it's a rendering engine.

Epiphany-extensions includes a WebKit one.

[OpenFish]

I like Iceweasel it's just the same but it can go in gnu licensed packages witch means all us deb people don't all have compile it are selves! witch is nice and fire fox should chill out and find a compromise + dose it not also have more open plug ins etc which is also nice!! p.s dose it not have a few security twikes

[angryfirelord]

So a couple Mozilla devs got whiny. As long as the source code is there and the people are committed to the project, I'm happy.

About your sig:

You think firefox is completely free? Think again. Several elements are restricted by the EULA, including the trademarked Firefox name, artwork, and the proprietary Talkback crash reporter.
The mozilla corp. made $72 Millions on FF in 2005.
I suppose we shouldn't use Ubuntu either because they make a profit from tech support and Canonical enforces trademarks. Heck, let's not use Linux either because the name is trademarked by Linus Torvalds. Sorry, but if you're hoping that open-source == public domain, you're not thinking realistically.

[Sef]

umm...what exactly is IceWeasel?

IceWeasel is Firefox, but without the restrictions on the nonsource code items, e.g. artwork, name, etc.

[indecisive]

I agree with creeco. If we allow the term "open-source" to be tainted and misused, we will be falling on a slippery slope towards the end of open-source.

[Polygon]

i use firefox, cause

the CODE of firefox is 100% open source

the trademark and the art of the logo isnt.

but people dont really care about the logo when they are hacking the browser anyway

and, using swiftweasel means that i just have a different name/icon....im not going to waste my time switching just because "oh my gosh this logo isnt 100% free!"

the code is open source, the stuff that actually matters.

[karellen]

I don't care. I use Firefox because it's a good browser, not because it's open source ;). the same goes basically for every application

[wrtpeeps]

I couldn't care less about open source, freedom stuff, etc etc. I use firefox cause it's good.

On debian, I find that when you apt-get install firefox it STILL installs iceweasel, which is actually REALLY ANNOYING.

I had to go through and remove iceweasel (which, no matter what you say, doesn't feel "right" compared to proper firefox) and install firefox manually.

Pain in the backside and will do nothing to encourage new users on linux.

[RiceMonster]

Meh, I don't see the point in switching to a different browser just because the logo isn't "free".

[geoken]

I agree with creeco. If we allow the term "open-source" to be tainted and misused, we will be falling on a slippery slope towards the end of open-source.

And if we allow the term open source to imply a complete lack of control over trademarks and branding we'll fall towards the end of open source faster.

If I released an app and someone was allowed to take my source, turn it into a virus, then re-release and still crediting me as the creator I wouldn't even consider an open source license.

It isn't really about the source code at all. It's about the ability to release something under someone elses name.

[duckfeet]

A lot of guys I know use linux because they don't *got* to do anything...I use Open Source, mostly, and when I don't, I don't...still sleep nights...



<snip)
Personally i prefer iceweasel because it lets people use their own logo for their browser, and if you say youre OPEN SOURCE you have to be it 100% and not 99%.

[duckfeet]

Absolutely, I use Firefox, Opera, and even Epiphany, (and Sound of lightning striking me!, even Windows Explorer to download drivers for my XP box, which I keep alive so I can help people who have problems with it...).

I have what bitter philosphy instructors call "situational ethics" :)

Watcha gonna do...



I couldn't care less about open source, freedom stuff, etc etc. I use firefox cause it's good.

On debian, I find that when you apt-get install firefox it STILL installs iceweasel, which is actually REALLY ANNOYING.

I had to go through and remove iceweasel (which, no matter what you say, doesn't feel "right" compared to proper firefox) and install firefox manually.

Pain in the backside and will do nothing to encourage new users on linux.

[tom66]

He's referring to the logo. It has some kind of protection on it which the open source community doesn't like.

Personally I don't actually care and am perfectly happy using Firefox.

+1 Same

[Bachstelze]

This is ridiculous. Those who don't like Firefox can also quit using Ubuntu, because its logo has the same kind of "protection" the Firefox one has.

[mrgnash]

I'm not open source; I'm keeping my DNA strictly proprietary, thankyou.

[Icehuck]

This is ridiculous. Those who don't like Firefox can also quit using Ubuntu, because its logo has the same kind of "protection" the Firefox one has.

Heck, I could do it a lot better and say they shouldn't even be on the internet. Cisco routers(which make up a majority of the internet) aren't running as open source.

[Jokimoto]

I installed swiftweasel on AMD64 Hardy because I had trouble getting FF flash working when I first installed Ubuntu. I'm new to linux in general so went w/what worked for most ppl w/the same problem. Swiftweasel, as someone pointed out, had a build just for my machine and it's worked fine. I then installed Opera and pointed it to the same flash plugin and use that almost exclusively :) Oh, and hasn't anyone read Heinlein? T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L., people.

[duckfeet]

Another "program" I really like, has what they call "Rule 62:"

Don't Take Yourself So Damn Seriously!

As in life, as in Operating Systems...

[eldragon]

i havent read all replies and someone might have already pointed this out. but....
what makes locking on a trademark closed source?

open source means.....OPEN SOURCE. as in. the text files used to build the program should be open, and available to everyone.

[Paqman]

All this fuss about a logo. I don't think it was logos that RMS was trying to protect when he wrote the GPL. Common sense would give Mozilla a bit of slack on this one.

[saulgoode]

All this fuss about a logo. I don't think it was logos that RMS was trying to protect when he wrote the GPL. Common sense would give Mozilla a bit of slack on this one.

It is a bit more problematic than just a logo. If you modify the Firefox code, you can't call your modified version "Firefox". Mozilla only supports a previous version of Firefox for six months after a new version is out. A distro which wishes to apply a security update or bug fix to that older version is prohibited from doing so -- unless they change the name.

[SomeGuyDude]

This is ridiculous. Those who don't like Firefox can also quit using Ubuntu, because its logo has the same kind of "protection" the Firefox one has.

I don't like FF because I find the forks work better. I guess I should stop using Ubuntu for similar reasons?

[jnw222]

they also use their own license and the lgpl

[wrtpeeps]

I don't like FF because I find the forks work better. I guess I should stop using Ubuntu for similar reasons?

The forks are the same thing. :lolflag::lolflag:

[indecisive]

I'm not open source; I'm keeping my DNA strictly proprietary, thankyou.

Will you be harmed by releasing your DNA? May others not benefit? Would you rather feel conceited that you have something just your own, or help noble scientific projects aimed toward advancing medical research? In otherwords, the choice is between ego and advancement for the good of ALL, including you.

[karellen]

Will you be harmed by releasing your DNA? May others not benefit? Would you rather feel conceited that you have something just your own, or help noble scientific projects aimed toward advancing medical research? In otherwords, the choice is between ego and advancement for the good of ALL, including you.

I'm for the ego ;)

[Methuselah]

The name 'linux' is trademark Linus Torvalds BTW.

The question is what do you call a derived work of an open source project.
If you give it the same name as something else that'll evidently be a source of confusion.