On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jim Campbell <email@example.com> wrote:
Thanks for your input, and for bringing some of these issues to our attention.* I'd like to try and summarize some of the issues and concerns that people have.*
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 5:31 AM, Marko Oreskovic <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Also, Chrome extensions aren't yet as powerful, as the Adblock
> lookalikes for Chrome can't actually block ads from being loaded, just
> prevent them from being displayed. This exposes you to a lot more
> scrutiny from advertising companies.
Also +1 against Chrome as default anywhere.
I use Noscript extension for Firefox and Seamonkey and I mostly could
flash abuse all over internet is very extensive)
Also there is Chromium instead of that Chrome that is Google-controlled.
I do not trust Chrome at all.
There are many things that Chrome is doing that ordinary browser should
not do, regarding user privacy, and is used and could be used to track
user on internet:
I mentioned Google Chrome in the subject of my message, but at this point we would only be considering Chromium.* Relating to the srware.net article Marcos linked to above, I think this would have the following implications.* Please consider these as comments on the issue, not advocacy of one browser over the other.
- Client ID - I don't think this would be relevant, as we would be using an Ubuntu package.* I'd be glad to know if my thoughts here are incorrect.
- Time Stamp - Same as above.
- Suggest - May be an issue, although I think this behavior also occurs with the Firefox searchbar.* In a way, the address bar on Chromium is a big searchbar, though.
- Alternate error pages - I'm not familiar with this issue.* The site says, "Depending on configuration . . . "* Can anyone explain if there is a setting for this?
- Error reporting - This is user-configurable, but I will check the default setting for Chromium.
- RLZ-tracking - Not sure if this would apply to Chromium, as it is an Ubuntu package, not direct from Google.* I'd be glad to know if this does apply to an Ubuntu Chromium package, though.
- Google Updater - Not applicable to an Ubuntu Chromium package
- URL-Tracker - It's unclear to me what the problem is here (i.e., I can't understand how they've phrased the issue).* It sounds like the google home page is opening?* But it is dependent on the configuration?* Can anyone else explain this?
I'll make a few other notes.
1) I checked, and Ubuntu's deal with Yahoo will not impact Chromium (or any other browsers) in X/K/Ubuntu.* All other browsers will stay with their default searchbar configurations (as appropriate).* Of course, Chromium would default to a Google search, similar to most browsers.
2) With regards to translations, I checked the Chromium's packager, and he said that they would have to "bend" the Chromium package to get it translatable via Launchpad.* Thus, this remains an outstanding issue at this time, and there's no promise that this would be resolved in time for Lucid.
3) I agree about the less powerful adblock extensions, but how many people use these?* Is having them available going to impact the core set of Xubuntu users?* I am not saying that it absolutely will not impact the core set of Xubuntu users, I am just asking the question.* How many Xubuntu users rely on adblock?* If there is not a good adblock extension now, will a better adblock extension be possible down the road, or does Chromium's setup prevent something like this from working well?
4) Xubuntu does try to emphasize lightness where possible, and we strive to make Xubuntu usable on systems with less memory.* From the Xubuntu strategy document, "Xubuntu does not exclusively target users with low, modest, or high
powered machines but instead targets the entire spectrum with a strong
focus on enabling lower end machines. Xubuntu's extra responsiveness and
speed, among other positive traits, can be appreciated by all users
regardless of their hardware."* Chromium would have a clear advantage here, even compared to FF 3.6.
5) The issue of patented codecs brought up by Andrew Blomen is an interesting one.* I agree that we should encourage use of Free codecs where possible.
What do people think?* Given all of this, I'm not so sure that Chromium is the best fit for Xubuntu, at least for now.* The translation issue is important to our users, and the codec issue is important to me.* The privacy issue seems important to some, but I tend to think that most anything we do on the internet can be tracked somehow (unless we use the extreme step of using Tor or something).* The smaller memory footprint provided by Chromium would be a "nice to have" feature, but we've survived using Firefox for a good while - using it for a LTS would probably be the best thing to do.
You forgot the UI consistency issue, which I personally consider pretty important.
Anyway, for as far as we can't already say this has been concluded, here's another vote for not including it in the LTS. I also saw Lionel uploaded Chromium to the Lucid archives so at least people can try it without having to enable a PPA
xubuntu-devel mailing list