×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ubuntu Developers Revisit Replacing Firefox With Chromium

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the but-firefox-has-a-cooler-logo dept.

Ubuntu 153

Via Phoronix comes news that Ubuntu is revisiting replacing Firefox with Chromium as the default browser. Reasons include that Chromium is the basis of Ubuntu Touch and their new web apps platform, and using a single browser for all versions of Ubuntu would simplify maintenance. From the article: "Expressed shortcomings of switching to Google's Chromium open-source web-browser is that data migration from Firefox isn't too obvious, extensions don't migrate between browsers, Chromium isn't supported on all architectures (e.g. PowerPC), the browser doesn't work with the Orca screen reader and doesn't integrate well for accessibility reasons, there is no native PDF plug-in, and Chromium is said to have worse performance under memory pressure. There were also some concerns expressed about differences with WebApps in Chromium. ... It looks like the switch to Chromium will happen in the name of a better user experience for the desktop with Chrome/Chromium now arguably surpassing Firefox in its features and performance while pushing Chromium as the default leads to a more consistent experience across Ubuntu form factors from phones/tablets to the desktop." The Ubuntu community will have their input solicited as the next step. The Ubuntu Developer Summit session has notes and a full video of today's discussion.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

153 comments

"there is no native PDF plug-in" (1)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about a year ago | (#43745025)

Well Chrome has one if you want to use it, just doesn't come with Chromium. I am sure they want Chromium instead of Chrome for the whole "pure open-source" thing it has going for it, though.

Re:"there is no native PDF plug-in" (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43745127)

Well Chrome has one if you want to use it, just doesn't come with Chromium. I am sure they want Chromium instead of Chrome for the whole "pure open-source" thing it has going for it, though.

I suspect that not using Google's pet browser for your competitor-to-Google's-pet-OS might be more of a consideration that OSS purity...

Obviously, Google has no reason to make the slightest nuisance of themselves if people install Chrome on any desktop Linux; but Ubuntu is shooting for some touch-based something that can be shoehorned into phones and tablets, an area where Google has slightly more incentive to be unhelpful.

Is there any word on why they aren't looking at libpoppler, if they need PDF rendering? Practically all the other major linux PDF-reader applications seem to use it.

Chrome is a trojan horrse.. (5, Insightful)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about a year ago | (#43745929)

Chrome is a trojan horse to weaken Mozilla which is becoming less powerful because Google uses its ad dollars to bundle Chrome with Flash, Acrobat and Java updates by default thereby reducing Firefox's share and has the nice side effect of reducing Google's payments to Mozilla for searches.

And Web DRM? Of course it's going to be a HTML standard very soon because IE, Safari and... ding! Chrome are going to be supporting it fully with 80% marketshare and people will blame Firefox if Netflix doesn't work in it and recommend you switch to Chrome to see movies! iOS, Android and Windows Phone, BBOS will add support for 100% tablet and phone support for the DRM.

Chrome on Chromebook already has the EME DRM module. Firefox and Opera are powerless to stop it. We have already seen this play out with the h.264 HTML5 video support in Chrome fiasco when Google promised it would drop H.264 from Chrome to push WebM but did not and Mozilla was left holding the bag with WebM and had to recently had to eat crow and add support for patent encumbered H264. The web is owned by the corporates, not individuals anymore, there was some hope when Firefox was at 40%, not anymore. And we all willingly gave them the power by believing in "open" and "do no evil" and switching in droves.

Re:Chrome is a trojan horrse.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43748071)

This is about Chromium, pure open source build, not Chrome. Leave your tinfoil at at the entrance please.

Re:Chrome is a trojan horrse.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43748495)

It's not a tinfoil hat.

Read his posting history - he's a Microsoft evangelist trying to promote discord.

Re:Chrome is a trojan horrse.. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43748259)

I switched from Firefox to Chrome for a simple reason: porn. With Chrome, it was possible to have both private windows and regular windows open at the same time, and in Firefox, it wasn't.

Well, now Firefox does have that capability, and wouldn't you know it, its market share is ticking back up again.

Re:"there is no native PDF plug-in" (2)

White Flame (1074973) | about a year ago | (#43746293)

I use Chromium instead of Chrome to avoid all the Google phone-home tracking. I just want a browser, not corporate nuptials.

bend over and open your butthole (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745029)

... and let Adobe and Google cram it full of their annoying ads and inspect the dirty crap that comes out.

I guess some people like that sort of thing, so who am I to judge?

Steve Jobs killed Ubuntu (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745047)

Well, to be more accurate, his cocksucking fanboys did.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Good luck making your lives "easier", Canonical (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745053)

In other words, Ubuntu wants to use Chromium as their Internet Explorer? I sure hope those Touch-compatible devices have gobs of RAM and fast multicore CPUs.

Fine by me (2, Insightful)

geek (5680) | about a year ago | (#43745065)

Firefox is on the decline. I really do hope they switch gears and get Firefox up-to-par again. I would really hate to see Chrome dominating the web like IE once did. Mozilla just seems more interested in Rust and FirefoxOS these days. I know they are capable of doing more than one thing at a time but Firefox needs some serious love, I'd like it to be the focus again.

Re:Fine by me (2)

Threni (635302) | about a year ago | (#43745103)

IE dominated because back then everyone used Windows. Those days are over. People are using Chrome because it's fast, actively developed and seems reasonably secure - at least, security isn't just an afterthought. I used to use Firefox but the mobile versions were always huge, slow and just not as good as the alternatives (Dolphin, stock and Chrome on any of the Android phones I used), and syncing between devices always asked for details I just didn't have. There are other non-Chrome browsers, even on mobile, so the loss of Firefox isn't really a problem.

Re:Fine by me (1, Redundant)

cultiv8 (1660093) | about a year ago | (#43745151)

actually I use chrome because every time I go to google homepage it asks me to install it and I get tired of clicking "remind me later". Install now is so much easier than saying no.

Re:Fine by me (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745217)

that reminds me of the first time i had sex...

Re: Fine by me (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745245)

Well, I found it actually easier to say no...to Google as my search engine of choice, that is. I switched to https://duckduckgo.com and have never since looked back.

Re: Fine by me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745669)

As a tech, duckduckgo isn't fantastic. I'm still hunting for a search engine that at least *sometimes* returns more than 2 relevant results (especially since the first 2 results usually aren't what I need).

Re: Fine by me (1, Informative)

BobaFett (93158) | about a year ago | (#43746277)

As a tech, duckduckgo isn't fantastic. I'm still hunting for a search engine that at least *sometimes* returns more than 2 relevant results (especially since the first 2 results usually aren't what I need).

As a tech, duckduckgo returns whatever bing returns :) It's just an anonymizing front end to bing.

Re: Fine by me (4, Informative)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | about a year ago | (#43747563)

duckduckgo returns whatever bing returns :) It's just an anonymizing front end to bing.

No. It's not. [duckduckgo.com] : "DuckDuckGo gets its results from over 50 sources, including DuckDuckBot (our own crawler), crowd-sourced sites (in our own index), Yahoo! (through BOSS), embed.ly, WolframAlpha, EntireWeb, Bing, Yandex, and Blekko." Please don't FUD on the Duck.

Re: Fine by me (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about a year ago | (#43748531)

We had that approach back in the 90s with Metacrawler, which at the time aggregated better search results than, say, DEC's altavista.

Then Google showed up...

Privacy concerns aside, does DDG deliver 'better' search results than what caused Metacrawler to bite the dust?

Re: Fine by me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745307)

I can't really say that the current release of Firefox Mobile is either huge or slow. In fact I find it holds its own against the competition. And if the beta and aurora builds paint a halfway accurate picture of what there is to expect, then exciting times may await us. :-)

Re:Fine by me (3, Interesting)

pmontra (738736) | about a year ago | (#43745485)

Yes, everybody was using Windows (me too) but I remember that I left Netscape for IE5 because IE5 was so much better than Netscape 4 (IE4 was a little worse). IE6 was a good step forward, it killed Netscape and then the development stopped. Firefox appeared after a few years and was so much better than IE6, so I switched again. Chrome is a little faster than Firefox now, but the gap is getting narrower and its versions of NoScript, AdBlock, Firebug are worse so I'm sticking to Firefox. I'll end up installing it from some repository if Ubuntu switches, not a problem.

Re:Fine by me (1)

smash (1351) | about a year ago | (#43748101)

Pretty much same here. For all the IE hate we have, its easy to forget what the alternatives were back in the day. Another reason IE was so popular was the IEAK which made it easy for ISPs to pre-configure dial up settings for their users and bundle a browser all pre-configured out of the box. This was FREE, I'm pretty sure back in the Netscape days, that sort of thing required a license.

Re:Fine by me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745629)

IE dominated because back then everyone used Windows

And Chrome is dominating now because the dominant search engine pushes it through their website: their search landing page, their email log-in / log-out page, ...

Re:Fine by me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746347)

IE dominated because back then everyone used Windows. Those days are over.

Nowadays Chrome dominates because everyone uses Google.com

Re:Fine by me (1)

smash (1351) | about a year ago | (#43748081)

No, IE dominated because of a few reasons - dialup - it was "good enough" (from an end user perspective) and a browser was several hours to download over dialup. It was needed for Windows update to work. And, like it or not, many corporate web apps were built with it. Also, it was configurable via group policy, so enterprises like it as it enables them to ensure end user browsers are configured in a sane state (security zones, proxy settings, etc.).

Re:Fine by me (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745199)

Fine by me too, because we've decided to replace Ubuntu next time we do a major install. Canonical has made one to many bone headed decision for our tastes.

Re:Fine by me (3, Interesting)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year ago | (#43746487)

Right. Switched to Mint after canonical's switch to Unity. Never have looked back.

Re:Fine by me (1)

smash (1351) | about a year ago | (#43748105)

Have only had a brief play with unity and don't get why so much hate? Yes it is dumbed down significantly. I still have a shell, it worked out of the box, and i haven't had to touch a configuration file yet? Things don't have to be hard to use to be powerful. Besides, if you don't like it, switch to another desktop environment?

Re:Fine by me (5, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | about a year ago | (#43745261)

How is Firefox on the decline? I use it on all of my primary systems and it's as snappy as ever. In fact it's so good that I find Chrome offers no advantages and lacks useful tools like Noscript.

Re:Fine by me (0)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year ago | (#43746523)

I'll give you one reason its on the decline, sort of (actually, I think that's overstating the state of it but yeah, its getting a little stupid.) Updates, fast and furious. They're updating ff so much a release graph looks like their graphing the motion of a nervous umbrella. Enough already. I really don't need to have my hour disrupted with another ff update. The software needs to be updated this often? Seriously?

Re:Fine by me (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43747205)

Why not switch to the ESR/long-term release? Or just turn off the automatic updates until you are ready for them (preferences -> advanced, update, check for updates but let me choose when to install them).

Re:Fine by me (3, Informative)

evilviper (135110) | about a year ago | (#43747373)

They're updating ff so much a release graph looks like their graphing the motion of a nervous umbrella. Enough already.

The Mozilla folks decided to make the public at-large their new beta-testers. That's not entirely unusual in the Open Source world.

But they do have a far more "stable" release you can use, instead. The ESR release works great, doesn't get all the new cruft, and generally just works. It's the version of Firefox in RHEL/CentOS repos, so most users are using it. There's no reason not-to go with ESR, except that Mozilla makes it hard to find:

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all.html [mozilla.org]

Re:Fine by me (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745613)

Firefox isn't on the decline, people just aren't paying attention to it anymore. You make it sound like they haven't been spending two years rewriting their Javascript engine, garbage collecting, HTML page layout rendering, and a multitude of other things.

While they're modernized their core browser and catching up to Chrome, they're also working on FirefoxOS, asm.js, and a whole host of other things. Just because you haven't been keeping up doesn't mean you're correct to say they're "declining".

Re:Fine by me (1, Insightful)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year ago | (#43746469)

Its still my go-to browser for now but yeah, all the weird version nonsense and the updates every few hours make it more of a pain in the ass than the useful thing it once was. But chrome or chromium? blah. I don't get why people use it as much as they do, chrome aint all that in my opinion.

Re:Fine by me (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | about a year ago | (#43747213)

Every once in a while, I go and evaluate all of the major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari, IE). I just finished a several-month evaluation of Firefox. While it is very good, you're right--it's just not as good as Chrome. The Mac version has a number of integration problems (doesn't use system scrollbars or rubberbanding, for example), Mac and Windows both have sync issues (constantly telling me it can't sync; also a draconic requirement to enable sync on various devices), and the lack of the omnibar all make it just less fun to use than Chrome.

Firefox OS is neat and all, but does anyone expect it to do, well, anything? I might expect such a phone for free, if they also gave me a free data plan and let me continue using my current phone. They need to focus on their browser or they'll cede more ground to Google.

Well... this is going to be awkward... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745087)

... I just switched back to Firefox after years with Chrome. The ol' girl has just gotten so good in these last few version; it's dev tools are damn near up to snuff with Chrome's-- and something, I can't quite put my finger on, is "nicer" about it. The way it handles animations just seems smoother to me. Plus I'm fearful of a Webkit/Blink only world. When there are monopolies standards go out the window, I'm looking at you Micro$oft.

I wonder if others are doing the same (switching back to FF), and they'll be reverting their decision here in a couple years... Hard to say, the browser wars are long from over...

Poor NoScript alternatives on Chromium (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745791)

I switched to Chromium for quite a while because some of my friends liked it, and I tried to put up with all the extra Javascript-enabled crap that was running because the JS-limiting options are very poor compared to NoScript running on Firefox.

Eventually I just couldn't take it anymore, and I had to switch back to FF. There's only so much suffering you can put up with, unless you're a true masochist.

Nothing but nothing beats a combination of Firefox with NoScript, FlashBlock, AdBlock and Ghostery add-ons, just nothing. They make the web usable again.

And Chromium will never get better in this area, because it's against Google's interest to allow users to block anything that interrupts the flow of advertising revenue and prevents user tracking. It'll be a sad day when any distro makes Chromium their default browser. Advertisers will wet themselves though.

Re:Well... this is going to be awkward... (5, Interesting)

ericcc65 (2663835) | about a year ago | (#43745913)

I switched back to firefox for a few reasons. Can't remember them all at the moment but here's a few:

* Sound on chrome was turning to crap after having it open a while on linux.
* I can install firefox in user space without root.
* Firefox actually seemed more stable and user friendly on my tablet than Chrome.
* Mouse gestures exist on linux unlike on Chrome
* Better access to create/use bookmarks through the sidebar than Chromes ugly approach
* Native PDF viewer now exists

Re:Well... this is going to be awkward... (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about a year ago | (#43748599)

Does the PDF viewer run acceptably fast on a modern machine?

I'm running a 9yo machine and pdf.js takes forever to render. When Okular is embedded (kparts integration), it's snappy.

pdf.js might be a good choice on Windows where you have that Adobe monstrosity updating itself every few days (I have used sumatra in the past) but KDE's viewer runs faster on old Linux desktops. :-)

Re:Well... this is going to be awkward... (4, Insightful)

gentlemen_loser (817960) | about a year ago | (#43746403)

... I just switched back to Firefox after years with Chrome. The ol' girl has just gotten so good in these last few version; ...

Interestingly enough, I have just recently done the same. Don't get me wrong - Chrome is a great browser by all means. From a technical standpoint, I view them both as equals. However, given two equals, I will choose the browser that does not nag me to log into a Google account that I do not otherwise need "for a better experience".

Re:Well... this is going to be awkward... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746539)

A few favourite features I like about Firefox:

  1. Youtube downloaders
  2. adblockers - sure, Chrome has them now, but just like AdAway they'll be gone soon
  3. easy autoscroll on Linux. Chrome requires an extension for this basic functionality

Good for Ubuntu for weighing the choices, and double-good on 'em if they keep the Fox.

Re:Well... this is going to be awkward... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746741)

I switched back to FF mainly because of :

* Smoother scrolling
* Prettier rendering - like you say, can't quite put my finger on it, but it looks better.

And also:
* Built in SOCKS proxy support - handy for accessing FB in China
* Problems with table border rendering in Chrome

Is it just me... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745117)

...or does that Chris Colson guy look like a 10 year old kid? In the initial load screen for the video, I couldn't see his "beard" so I thought we were being given a testimonial from "Ubuntu 4 Kidz!!!1!"

What's the big attraction of suicide while ahead? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745139)

Whenever the free software guys have a good thing going, they feel the need to look at Microsoft and commit suicide.

What with GNOME abolishing choice and imitating the registry, a central place not usefully manageable by the user? What with "one-click install" of binaries with bundled libraries, total security hell? What with "one OS to rule them all" across devices?

Windows 8 is the greatest failure from Redmond so far, so everybody rush and copy it.

Oops, something works really well. Let's change it.

Long Term (0)

sirhan (105815) | about a year ago | (#43745173)

I've been using Chromium as my main browser for quite some time now, and I have to say I prefer it in many aspects over Firefox.
It certainly reminds me of how Firefox *used* to be all those years ago, but it has the same fatal flaw: it can be bogged down to uselessness with poorly implemented extensions.
As far as the PDF issue goes, I use "Docs PDF/PowerPoint Viewer", which opens many different types of document in Google Docs. I prefer it to dedicated PDF viewer/editors myself.
Sadly, there are several packages that aren't available for the PPC branch, as I can attest, but that's the nature of using non x86 hardware in general, sad to say.
At the end of the day, the defaults can always be changed if you don't like them, and it's good to see that they're at least asking for community feedback instead of charging ahead with an ill conceived vision (I'm looking at you, Gnome 3 and Unity).

Doesn't Matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745189)

Ubuntu sucks, and generally, any distro that ships any browser by default is already too customized out of the box for me.

Do Not want (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745223)

Firefox works fine, comes with a wide variety of good extensions, and seems to be more configurable via about:config. Not only that, the privacy options are more obvious. As far as I can tell, the only way to get decent privacy settings with chromium by default is with command line arguments.

Irrelevant? (4, Interesting)

Luthair (847766) | about a year ago | (#43745231)

I can't but help think this decision is largely irrelevant to the majority of Ubuntu users. Unless I've somehow missed the news of Linux taking over the mainstream desktop, most users are technically savvy and undoubtedly already have their own browser preference and the knowledge to install it rendering discussions of upgrade paths largely irrelevant.

Sure Firefox users may dislike the extra step, but on the otherhand Chromium users will presumably be pleased that they no longer need to install it afterwards.

Re:Irrelevant? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745469)

Ubuntu users are not "technically savvy".... not by any stretch. The savvy computer people who like Linux have moved on to distributions which are less crappy and less insulting to their intelligence.

Re:Irrelevant? (2, Funny)

houghi (78078) | about a year ago | (#43745777)

majority of Ubuntu users [...] are technically savvy

Mod that as funny.
Sure, there are some, perhaps even many, but most? Nah.

(I can take the down mods. I have Karma to burn)

Re:Irrelevant? (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#43746743)

If you can take downmods, then just post your statement without invoking the reverse-mod pleading.

Re:Irrelevant? (1)

OhANameWhatName (2688401) | about a year ago | (#43747529)

this decision is largely irrelevant to the majority of Ubuntu users

It's a whitewash to make it look like a 'considered' decision while Canonical is drooling over the potential tablet market. Not only is the decision irrelevant, the publicising of the decision is irrelevant and the front page on /. only announces how irrelevant Ubuntu has become.

Re:Irrelevant? (1)

sunderland56 (621843) | about a year ago | (#43748373)

most users are technically savvy

All the technically savvy Ubuntu users left for other distros after the Gnome 3 fiasco.

Re:Irrelevant? (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about a year ago | (#43748667)

Some of us are lazy to do a fresh install.

I'm still using the same HD I ripped out of a dead laptop from 2008, originally running Intrepid.

raring's KDE runs well enough that I don't care to upgrade to vanilla debian testing.

Why so much bloat Firefox??? (5, Interesting)

duckgod (2664193) | about a year ago | (#43745237)

Message to Firefox developers: Please stop adding features that someone else can do with addons. For the life of me I can't figure out why Firefox started developing its own set of developer tools when Firebug is still one of the best tools on the market.

I beg of you to please strip anything out of Firefox that is not part to the web browsing experience and put it back in as a plugin if you have to. Just focus on being a web browser and having the best plug in interface possible.

Re:Why so much bloat Firefox??? (1)

CoolGopher (142933) | about a year ago | (#43745513)

If I had modpoints you'd get 'em!

Don't get me wrong, Firefox is still my preferred browser, but I so wish it would slim down a bit. You know, be a browser instead of a kitchen sink. Then again, I'm a vi user, not an emacs user... ;)

Re:Why so much bloat Firefox??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745571)

If you're looking to avoid bloat you shouldn't be looking at Chrome...

Re:Why so much bloat Firefox??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745597)

I hope you're not saying this as a chrome user, as it's always boggled my mind just how much memory chrome uses.

Re:Why so much bloat Firefox??? (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#43745771)

Because developers add features that scratch their itch? This open source software, have we heard of it and how it works? "Added developer tools to Firefox" is an outstanding feather in the hat for any resume. Are you going to tell a Firefox developer that she can't enhance her career like that?

Re:Why so much bloat Firefox??? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746043)

Because firebug was keeping people on old versions of firefox. Add ons are great but the users Mozilla really needed on nightly and beta releases were not even on the latest release just because of firebug.

Re:Why so much bloat Firefox??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746055)

Where is this bloat you speak of, and compared to what competing product? I'm genuinely curious, because I can't spot it. Even their primary focus with their dev tools has been under-the-hood stuff that .. wait for it .. Firebug directly benefits from.

It's like you're selectively choosing the negative aspects and bloating your negative opinion of them, while conveniently ignoring all the amazing progress that Firefox has made the past few years.

Besides, how much more basic and customizable could their UI get? Are you saying that all you want is a back button, url bar, and menu option for quitting? Or are you implying that having a 3d visualization interface for the webdev tools is in no way useful and novel?

This will be the last straw (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745265)

If they try to force me to use Chrome, I will have to go find another distro.

Here's my current short list of things required to make Ubuntu usable:

  • sudo apt-get -y install gnome indicator-applet-session compizconfig-settings-manager
  • sudo /usr/lib/lightdm/lightdm-set-defaults -s gnome-classic
  • gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.wm.preferences button-layout 'menu:minimize,maximize,close'
  • gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.interface ubuntu-overlay-scrollbars false

After installing indicator-applet-session:

  1. Winkey-Alt-Rightclick on the clock in the panel and select "Remove".

    (This deletes ALL the default items in the Panel, by deleting the "Indicator Applet Complete".)

  2. Winkey-Alt-Rightclick on the Panel and select "Add to Panel". Select "Indicator Applet Session"
  3. Winkey-Alt-Rightclick on the Panel and select "Add to Panel". Select "User Menu"
  4. Winkey-Alt-Rightclick on the Panel and select "Add to Panel". Select "Clock"
  5. Winkey-Alt-Rightclick on the Panel and select "Add to Panel". Select "Indicator Applet"

After you've installed compizconfig-settings-manager:

  • Go to system tools > preferences > compizconfig
  • Check "Windows Management" > "Static Application Switcher" (WARNING: "Application Switcher" hangs the machine.)
  • Check "Extras" > "Window Previews"

After you install apache2:

  • sudo a2enmod userdir
  • service apache2 restart

Re:This will be the last straw (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745449)

Not that I would defend Ubuntu in its current incarnation, but that's not a terribly long list. Any distro is going to require some tweaking to satisfy an experienced user... the beauty is that once you have it down to a science, disaster recovery is a simple copy/paste away.

Re:This will be the last straw (1)

pmontra (738736) | about a year ago | (#43745529)

That is more or less what I did. I also deleted the top panel and moved everything into the bottom one.

Re:This will be the last straw (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746887)

Then what is the point of using Ubuntu at all?

Don't care if Chromium is default (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745301)

As long as Firefox remains in the Main repository. If it's demoted to Universe, then that's going to be a problem because packages in Universe are updated in an almost ad hoc fashion (even for security updates). Maybe there's a maintainer keeping it up to date and maybe there isn't, it's entirely up to the community volunteers. However, if Firefox remains in Main, then it's guaranteed to get timely updates.

Expressed shortcomings... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745305)

...

And, Chromium sucks balls.

Did they not just list all the reasons why not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745345)

I don't see why they need someone else to tell them it's a bad idea.

Re:Did they not just list all the reasons why not? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745411)

It's just a proposal at this stage. Nothings been decided.

Replacing Firefox with Chromium? (1)

dgharmon (2564621) | about a year ago | (#43745461)

Chromium is the default in the current Ubuntu, besides which, installing Firefox is trivially easy on any Ubuntu desktop installation, see on my current Ubuntu desktop:

Chromium: Version 25.0.1364.160 Ubuntu 13.04 (25.0.1364.160-0ubuntu3)

Firefox 21.0: Mozilla Firefox for Ubuntu canonical - 1.0

this doesn't add up (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745687)

How does one get from:

        shortcomings of switching to Chromium
                data migration from Firefox isn't too obvious,
                extensions don't migrate between browsers,
                Chromium isn't supported on all architectures (e.g. PowerPC),
                the browser doesn't work with the Orca screen reader
                and doesn't integrate well for accessibility reasons,
                there is no native PDF plug-in,
                and worse performance under memory pressure.

to:

        the switch to Chromium will happen in the name of a better user experience

(oh that's right, Ubuntu are the people who thought Unity was a better user experience ;-)

Just when you thought... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745747)

... Canonical couldn't possibly fuck it up any worse than they already have.

Keep It Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43745949)

Keep up the good work, Ubuntu.

So long as you can choose browsers, who cares? (1)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#43746035)

I really could give a rat's fat patoot which is the "default" browser as long as I can choose the one I want. It's not like Windows where there are applications tying into the browser framework, or where you must use the default browser to download updates.

Re:So long as you can choose browsers, who cares? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746577)

Thing is, that's exactly the real possibility here: they might build apps that rely on Chromium to the detriment of other browsers, in an Internet Explorer kind of way (at least on their Touch platform).

Arabic text rendering (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746437)

Great, I like chrome/chromium, but it still renders arabic italic text as squares. Let's hope Canonical decides to fix this before shipping 27.04

And then Shuttleworth will record your keystrokes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43746839)

Again. Ubuntu already got caught sending your local disk searches as query terms back to their corporate mothership, by default. What other nefariousness will they shove in and resell to others with the more obscure and difficult to monitor codebase of Chromium?

Is chrome Qt based? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43747169)

Firefox used GTK+. MIR will have Qt/MIR but will it have GTK+/MIR?

I'll be sticking with Firefox, as will others (3, Interesting)

OhANameWhatName (2688401) | about a year ago | (#43747557)

For the last while, Firefox has improved and performed well. A while back the Firefox team made an interface change to the browser which made it harder to use. I posted a note to the team talking about why it was wrong etc. They thanked me, and changed it back. That's more that can be said for the Ubuntu team.

This is just another excuse for unification across the Ubuntu platforms which is the Ubuntu headlong charge into obscurity. Nighty night Ubuntu, fare thee well.

Re:I'll be sticking with Firefox, as will others (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43748301)

apt-get install firefox

What's your beef?

Gee, that's very un-trendy (1)

tconnors (91126) | about a year ago | (#43747595)

I mean, the trend is to remove choice and features and pretend that configuration makes it too hard for the poor lusers (ala, gnome3).

One bug with chromium that has been marked as WontFix for this very reason, is issue 11612 [google.com] . "You can install an extension (that doesn't work in most situations you need it to, such as in the default about:blank)!". As bad as firefox has been getting since version 2, at least *that* particular feature still can be turned on.

But I do have to ask, WhyTF would anyone want an inbuilt PDF viewer? That's the first thing I disable in browsers that do that by default (except in very old editions of SuSE, where it was installed into the system and not able to be disabled because SuSE, at least then, liked to load everything unconditionally and not overridable by the user). Yes, you can have a poor replacement for a PDF viewer that isn't a first class PDF viewer and can't print and is slow, and half the key bindings just plain don't work, or you can have it in a dedicated PDF viewer that does One Thing Well, just like Unix intended.

Re:Gee, that's very un-trendy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43747737)

1) Users don't always have a PDF viewer installed (if a decent one is even available on their platform).
2) PDF.js isn't Firefox-specific, and runs fine in other browsers
3) If you're complaining about this, then why not complain about Google bundling a PDF viewer and Flash?
4) Unix didn't intend for there to be no alternatives to things
5) Browser aren't Unix, they're document viewers, which is what PDFs are
6) Why have SVG when there are better vector-graphics tools for platforms? Why have MathML when we have Tex? Etc etc.

Re:Gee, that's very un-trendy (1)

sunderland56 (621843) | about a year ago | (#43748411)

WhyTF would anyone want an inbuilt PDF viewer?

A browser is supposed to display whatever I click on - any file, any format. If it can play sound, play video, display photographs, display text... then why not a PDF? Seems strange to have one document format that it *cannot* display, and requires an external application to render.

Or did you want the browser to call an external program for things like .gif, .mov, .aiff - anything that is not plain old .html ??

Re:Gee, that's very un-trendy (1)

tconnors (91126) | about a year ago | (#43748533)

WhyTF would anyone want an inbuilt PDF viewer?

A browser is supposed to display whatever I click on - any file, any format. If it can play sound, play video, display photographs, display text... then why not a PDF? Seems strange to have one document format that it *cannot* display, and requires an external application to render.

Or did you want the browser to call an external program for things like .gif, .mov, .aiff - anything that is not plain old .html ??

Yes please, because those dedicated programs I have installed do a far better job with less memory and resource usage than a bloatware browser that tries to compromise on everything. You know, "do one job and do it well" kind of Unix philosophy.
(I do let my browser run animated gifs and SVG because they do it well enough. But I download .flvs whenever possible and play them in a media player, because the proprietary flash plugin on Linux is incompetently programmed, and the free plugin couldn't do Youtube last time I looked at it.)

U-byebye-buntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43748387)

Phasing it out progressively, as a few hard to make work elsewhere software lag in jumping the burning galleon effectively.

My opinions (2)

shaddyz (2925307) | about a year ago | (#43748395)

The most important reason why I use Mozilla Firefox is because it is Mozilla Firefox. Mozilla is one of the most important organizations for protecting our rights on the web. We are actively witnessing our freedom disappear from every aspect of our lives, including our Internet freedom. Google only protects our freedom when it happens to align with their business goals. They are profit driven, and that means our rights are their bargaining chips. I prefer the motivations of Mozilla and everything they represent.

I also love Firefox because it does everything I want it to do, and it's constantly improving. Eventually, Google will shift their focus on other projects and Firefox will be leaps ahead.

I am extremely disappointed to hear that Cannonical wants to replace Firefox with Chromium in Ubuntu. I have been repeatedly disappointed by Cannonical and Ubuntu to the point where I've decided all future operating installations will be a different distribution. For my desktop which still runs Ubuntu, I've long ditched Unity for Cinnamon, and I've replaced Ubuntu with Gentoo on my laptop. When the time comes, I plan on installing Gentoo on my desktop as well. I'm sure I'm going to get annoyed about all the packages that are designed to work with Ubuntu, but I just don't want to spend any more time uninstalling all the default programs, and then installing the ones I want. At least with Gentoo, I will never have to do another painful upgrade again (It uses a rolling release).

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...