Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Xubuntu Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/xubuntu-development/)
-   -   Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome (http://www.linux-archive.org/xubuntu-development/308885-replacing-firefox-google-chrome.html)

Jim Campbell 01-13-2010 05:29 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) <jonathan@ubuntu.com> wrote:


HI Jim



On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:

> I know that Charlie had said that switching browsers for an LTS wouldn't be

> a great idea, but given the points I've mentioned above, it seems one worth

> considering.* What do you think?



I also use Chrome/ium and performance-wise it's much better even on my

fast machines. It doesn't seem to be in main or universe yet though,

which I'm quite sure would be a prerequisite for getting it in

Xubuntu. Did they perhaps also discuss a roadmap for its inclusion at

UDS?



-Jonathan



Hi Jonathan,

It looks as though they are targeting Alpha3 for inclusion in the archives.

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-lucid-arm-lightweightbrowser



https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DiscussionArmLightweightBrowser

Although the notes are ARM-specific, could anyone tell me if Chromium would be built only for ARM?* I assume that it would be built for all architectures at the same time.



Jim

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Kaspar Kööp 01-13-2010 05:36 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
Hi,

Just to clarify... are we talking about google chrome, or chromium? As i understand they are 2 different things.

Since LL will be a LTS release, maybe we shouldn't include beta software.

Best,

Kaspar




2010/1/13 Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com>



On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) <jonathan@ubuntu.com> wrote:



HI Jim



On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:

> I know that Charlie had said that switching browsers for an LTS wouldn't be

> a great idea, but given the points I've mentioned above, it seems one worth

> considering.* What do you think?



I also use Chrome/ium and performance-wise it's much better even on my

fast machines. It doesn't seem to be in main or universe yet though,

which I'm quite sure would be a prerequisite for getting it in

Xubuntu. Did they perhaps also discuss a roadmap for its inclusion at

UDS?



-Jonathan



Hi Jonathan,

It looks as though they are targeting Alpha3 for inclusion in the archives.

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-lucid-arm-lightweightbrowser




https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DiscussionArmLightweightBrowser

Although the notes are ARM-specific, could anyone tell me if Chromium would be built only for ARM?* I assume that it would be built for all architectures at the same time.




Jim


--

xubuntu-devel mailing list

xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel




--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Jim Campbell 01-13-2010 05:43 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Kaspar Kööp <meborc@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi,

Just to clarify... are we talking about google chrome, or chromium? As i understand they are 2 different things.

Since LL will be a LTS release, maybe we shouldn't include beta software.

Best,



Kaspar



It looks like the mobile team is considering Chromium, so we would go with what they choose.*

With regards to the beta status, keep in mind that Ubuntu included betas for Firefox 3.0 in the Hardy Heron release because they knew that it was advantageous to them, the betas were stable enough for initial use, and they knew that the 3.0 release would be well-supported well throughout the 8.04 LTS life cycle.* Because the mobile team is going to include Chromium, we can know that it will receive updates throughout the 10.04 LTS life cycle, too.



Jim

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Vincent 01-13-2010 07:46 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:


On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Kaspar Kööp <meborc@gmail.com> wrote:




Hi,

Just to clarify... are we talking about google chrome, or chromium? As i understand they are 2 different things.

Since LL will be a LTS release, maybe we shouldn't include beta software.

Best,





Kaspar



It looks like the mobile team is considering Chromium, so we would go with what they choose.*

With regards to the beta status, keep in mind that Ubuntu included betas for Firefox 3.0 in the Hardy Heron release because they knew that it was advantageous to them, the betas were stable enough for initial use, and they knew that the 3.0 release would be well-supported well throughout the 8.04 LTS life cycle.* Because the mobile team is going to include Chromium, we can know that it will receive updates throughout the 10.04 LTS life cycle, too.






I'm definitely not opposed to including Chromium per se, but I am when it comes to Lucid. Though the support argument may be valid, I think it requires more testing and doesn't have enough guarantees to work for an LTS release. It doesn't just mean Chromium should work, it also means that other applications should work with it. I can imagine there being applications having opening in Firefox hardcoded due to it being the de facto standard. I recall that switching browsers for me did cause some additional problems. Not unovercomeable (that's not a word, is it?), but not worth doing in an LTS release. It should just work. For any application people install.



Also, there are additional issues, such as UI consistency. I think it definitely warrants a thorough evaluation that could be started already, but should IMHO not be put into action in this cycle (if there even would be time for that, which I doubt).


*Jim

Best,
--
Vincent

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Marcos 01-14-2010 07:18 AM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
Hi!
I vote for Chromium, not Chrome.

But Chromium and Chrome has a important problem: I can't localize to
my language.
Only the languages that they choose, can enter in Chromium/Chrome.
You can read more here: http://acurti.es/8la
Marked as "Won't fix" :( I think is contrary to the free software.

Chromium/Chrome isn't integrated with the system, with "special"
menus, they not use the Guide of Usability :(

Best regards.




On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Vincent <mailinglists@vinnl.nl> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Kaspar Kööp <meborc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Just to clarify... are we talking about google chrome, or chromium? As i
>>> understand they are 2 different things.
>>>
>>> Since LL will be a LTS release, maybe we shouldn't include beta software.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Kaspar
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It looks like the mobile team is considering Chromium, so we would go with
>> what they choose.
>>
>> With regards to the beta status, keep in mind that Ubuntu included betas
>> for Firefox 3.0 in the Hardy Heron release because they knew that it was
>> advantageous to them, the betas were stable enough for initial use, and they
>> knew that the 3.0 release would be well-supported well throughout the 8.04
>> LTS life cycle.* Because the mobile team is going to include Chromium, we
>> can know that it will receive updates throughout the 10.04 LTS life cycle,
>> too.
>>
>
> I'm definitely not opposed to including Chromium per se, but I am when it
> comes to Lucid. Though the support argument may be valid, I think it
> requires more testing and doesn't have enough guarantees to work for an LTS
> release. It doesn't just mean Chromium should work, it also means that other
> applications should work with it. I can imagine there being applications
> having opening in Firefox hardcoded due to it being the de facto standard. I
> recall that switching browsers for me did cause some additional problems.
> Not unovercomeable (that's not a word, is it?), but not worth doing in an
> LTS release. It should just work. For any application people install.
>
> Also, there are additional issues, such as UI consistency. I think it
> definitely warrants a thorough evaluation that could be started already, but
> should IMHO not be put into action in this cycle (if there even would be
> time for that, which I doubt).
>
>>
>> Jim
>
> Best,
> --
> Vincent
>
> --
> xubuntu-devel mailing list
> xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
>
>

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Alexander Blomen 01-14-2010 07:55 AM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
Hey,

I have 2 points from a webdeveloper's point of view about chrom[e|ium].
At this time google uses the heavily patented H.264 codec for HTML5
video tags (and for this it depends on ffmpeg btw).
Firefox uses ogg/theora, which in my point of view, is much better for
the web and the open source community as a whole.

It also does not jet support the css @font-face tag by default for
embedding fonts in websites, while this might be only a problem for
webdevelopers, it does force you to make the choice between flash (which
is bad, mkay) or just ignoring chrome users (which from a design
standpoint is not really an option).

So while I agree that chrome is much and much faster, and v8 is a great
javascript engine, these are things that IMHO at the end of the day make
an impact on everyone using the web and especially the ones that prefer
FOSS to propertary, patented or any other form of non-free software.

Just my 2 cents.

Alexander

On 01/14/2010 09:18 AM, Marcos wrote:
> Hi!
> I vote for Chromium, not Chrome.
>
> But Chromium and Chrome has a important problem: I can't localize to
> my language.
> Only the languages that they choose, can enter in Chromium/Chrome.
> You can read more here: http://acurti.es/8la
> Marked as "Won't fix" :( I think is contrary to the free software.
>
> Chromium/Chrome isn't integrated with the system, with "special"
> menus, they not use the Guide of Usability :(
>
> Best regards.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:46 PM, Vincent<mailinglists@vinnl.nl> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Jim Campbell<jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Kaspar Kööp<meborc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Just to clarify... are we talking about google chrome, or chromium? As i
>>>> understand they are 2 different things.
>>>>
>>>> Since LL will be a LTS release, maybe we shouldn't include beta software.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Kaspar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> It looks like the mobile team is considering Chromium, so we would go with
>>> what they choose.
>>>
>>> With regards to the beta status, keep in mind that Ubuntu included betas
>>> for Firefox 3.0 in the Hardy Heron release because they knew that it was
>>> advantageous to them, the betas were stable enough for initial use, and they
>>> knew that the 3.0 release would be well-supported well throughout the 8.04
>>> LTS life cycle. Because the mobile team is going to include Chromium, we
>>> can know that it will receive updates throughout the 10.04 LTS life cycle,
>>> too.
>>>
>>
>> I'm definitely not opposed to including Chromium per se, but I am when it
>> comes to Lucid. Though the support argument may be valid, I think it
>> requires more testing and doesn't have enough guarantees to work for an LTS
>> release. It doesn't just mean Chromium should work, it also means that other
>> applications should work with it. I can imagine there being applications
>> having opening in Firefox hardcoded due to it being the de facto standard. I
>> recall that switching browsers for me did cause some additional problems.
>> Not unovercomeable (that's not a word, is it?), but not worth doing in an
>> LTS release. It should just work. For any application people install.
>>
>> Also, there are additional issues, such as UI consistency. I think it
>> definitely warrants a thorough evaluation that could be started already, but
>> should IMHO not be put into action in this cycle (if there even would be
>> time for that, which I doubt).
>>
>>>
>>> Jim
>>
>> Best,
>> --
>> Vincent
>>
>> --
>> xubuntu-devel mailing list
>> xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
>>
>>
>

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Vincent 01-14-2010 01:00 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Alexander Blomen <info@ablomen.nl> wrote:


Hey,



I have 2 points from a webdeveloper's point of view about chrom[e|ium].

At this time google uses the heavily patented H.264 codec for HTML5

video tags (and for this it depends on ffmpeg btw).

Firefox uses ogg/theora, which in my point of view, is much better for

the web and the open source community as a whole.



It also does not jet support the css @font-face tag by default for

embedding fonts in websites, while this might be only a problem for

webdevelopers, it does force you to make the choice between flash (which

is bad, mkay) or just ignoring chrome users (which from a design

standpoint is not really an option).



So while I agree that chrome is much and much faster, and v8 is a great

_javascript_ engine, these are things that IMHO at the end of the day make

an impact on everyone using the web and especially the ones that prefer

FOSS to propertary, patented or any other form of non-free software.



Hi,



Chromium uses Ogg in addition to H.264, so while that might stimulate
the use of that patented codec it doesn't prevent usage of Ogg. I also
wouldn't be afraid that including it in Xubuntu will impact the move of
the web towards open codecs a lot.



Webdevelopers not being able to include their own fonts has been a
problem for years, so it isn't heavily used yet. Therefore I think
Xubuntu users won't really be disadvantaged (you still have this
problem with all the copies of IE6 floating around anyway), and having
some websites using the fallback font really isn't a blocker. Besides,
I think it's reasonable to expect this to be supported in a reasonable
amount of time - perhaps even before Lucid (or Lucid+1) is released.
Every browser has disadvantages like this.
*
Just my 2 cents.



Alexander

Best,
--
Vincent

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Jim Campbell 01-14-2010 02:21 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
Hi Marcos,

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Marcos <marcoscostales@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi!

I vote for Chromium, not Chrome.



But Chromium and Chrome has a important problem: I can't localize to

my language.

Only the languages that they choose, can enter in Chromium/Chrome.

You can read more here: http://acurti.es/8la

Marked as "Won't fix" :( I think is contrary to the free software.



Chromium/Chrome isn't integrated with the system, with "special"

menus, they not use the Guide of Usability :(



Best regards.



I could deal with the UI issues, but the i10n and i18n issues do not make me happy.* One of the key strengths of free and open source projects is the ability to translate the software into a person's native language.* For the Chromium team to mark that bug as "won't fix," doesn't seem right.



If they wanted to mark it as "wishlist," I could understand.* I mean, if it takes a lot of effort to set up a translation infrastructure . . . maybe they don't have the time to get to that right now.



If the software can't be localized, then I wouldn't see much point in including it in Xubuntu.* If someone knows of a way around this on the Ubuntu side that I'm not aware of, please feel free to mention it.* Otherwise, I would be willing to forgo any further discussion of using Chromium in Xubuntu for now.



Jim

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Jim Campbell 01-14-2010 02:38 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi Marcos,

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Marcos <marcoscostales@gmail.com> wrote:



Hi!

I vote for Chromium, not Chrome.



But Chromium and Chrome has a important problem: I can't localize to

my language.

Only the languages that they choose, can enter in Chromium/Chrome.

You can read more here: http://acurti.es/8la

Marked as "Won't fix" :( I think is contrary to the free software.



Chromium/Chrome isn't integrated with the system, with "special"

menus, they not use the Guide of Usability :(



Best regards.



I could deal with the UI issues, but the i10n and i18n issues do not make me happy.* One of the key strengths of free and open source projects is the ability to translate the software into a person's native language.* For the Chromium team to mark that bug as "won't fix," doesn't seem right.




If they wanted to mark it as "wishlist," I could understand.* I mean, if it takes a lot of effort to set up a translation infrastructure . . . maybe they don't have the time to get to that right now.




If the software can't be localized, then I wouldn't see much point in including it in Xubuntu.* If someone knows of a way around this on the Ubuntu side that I'm not aware of, please feel free to mention it.* Otherwise, I would be willing to forgo any further discussion of using Chromium in Xubuntu for now.




Jim

To err on the side of caution, I am investigating further. :)*

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel

Vincent 01-14-2010 02:38 PM

Replacing Firefox with Google Chrome
 
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Jim Campbell <jwcampbell@gmail.com> wrote:


Hi Marcos,

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:18 AM, Marcos <marcoscostales@gmail.com> wrote:




Hi!

I vote for Chromium, not Chrome.



But Chromium and Chrome has a important problem: I can't localize to

my language.

Only the languages that they choose, can enter in Chromium/Chrome.

You can read more here: http://acurti.es/8la

Marked as "Won't fix" :( I think is contrary to the free software.



Chromium/Chrome isn't integrated with the system, with "special"

menus, they not use the Guide of Usability :(



Best regards.



I could deal with the UI issues, but the i10n and i18n issues do not make me happy.* One of the key strengths of free and open source projects is the ability to translate the software into a person's native language.* For the Chromium team to mark that bug as "won't fix," doesn't seem right.





If they wanted to mark it as "wishlist," I could understand.* I mean, if it takes a lot of effort to set up a translation infrastructure . . . maybe they don't have the time to get to that right now.





If the software can't be localized, then I wouldn't see much point in including it in Xubuntu.* If someone knows of a way around this on the Ubuntu side that I'm not aware of, please feel free to mention it.* Otherwise, I would be willing to forgo any further discussion of using Chromium in Xubuntu for now.





Jim


The software can be localized, I think, just not by contributors other than Google. You can even internationalize extensions now: http://blog.chromium.org/2010/01/google-chrome-extension.html



Of course not being able to contribute translations is not good, but judging by the comment I'm guessing it has been marked as Won't Fix erroneously:



haven't yet reached the stage of setting up all the infrastructure and other things
necessary.


(Emphasis mine)
*
Best,



--
Vincent

--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.