[GNU-linux-libre] Re: Status of google chrome and chromium

[Yavor Doganov]

A.J. Venter wrote:
> > > IMO it is a bad decision to make a "foreign" (in the GUI/toolkit
> > > sense) application the default
> >
> This is a valid point - but definitely not to the point of religion as
> you're taking it.

There's nothing even remotely related to religion about this.  It is
about user experience.  It is not ethically wrong to make IceCat or a
free version of Chrome the default browser; I just don't think it is a
wise choice (and yes, I speak from experience; I regret that we chose
Firefox when the company I work for migrated to GNU/Linux in 2003).

> At this stage, chromium is by far the most advanced browser on the
> market.

That's what you say.  I asked what's so advanced, and you answered
thusly:

> ideas like tabbed processes, 

Kazehakase has this as of 0.5.8 -- it spawns multiple per-tab and
per-window processes via DBus.  I'm not ultimately familiar with the
design of other browsers, but my guess is that it could be easily
implemented in Epiphany/Galeon, for example.

> vm'd scripting,

I admit I don't know what this means.

> and sandboxed plugins

Neither this, but if you mean user-installed plugins, that's possible
with Kazehakase too.

> make for a much faster (and far more importantly) a hugely more
> secure browser than anything else out there.

References and benchmarks, please.  This smells like something
subjective as it is (I'm not trying to argue, it's just something I've
been hearing from the Mozilla people for a loooooong time).

> By your logic - windows users - should only ever use internet explorer
> and never install another browser, yet the vast majority of firefox's
> userbase are on windows.

No, by my logic Windows users should use GNU.  Please don't try to
wrap my logic to fit your arguments.

I couldn't care less how browser X integrates with the proprietary
environment Y; my only advice is that Y users switch to a free OS,
even if they have to use the crippled Z as a browser.

> What this tells us - is that users will choose the best tool
> available for them, even if they have to sacrifice some integration
> for it.

Coming back to the topic for a moment -- if Google Chromium is such a
superior browser that has literally no replacement, then every user of
your distro will install it even if it's not the default browser, and
every sysadmin supporting a herd of workstations will install it too
(thus making it available for all users).

The "best" is something subjective.

> Integration is a very important concept

It is crucial to keep that in mind when you're bundling and delivering
a distro.  Of course it's entirely up to you how to do it and which
advices to follow.  I just wanted to say that.

> But basically, the short answer is: what makes it so special is that
> it's the first really innovative browser in a decade and a half, the
> first attempt to redesign how browsers work to face the challenges
> of the web as it is used today... it's so special, because it's the
> first actual advancement in it's field since mosaic.

Buzzwords.  Browser developers seem to think that they're developing
the most important application in the world, and all camps are pretty
good in attracting loyal fans (nothing wrong in that, it's just ironic
and funny).  A web-browser is no more important than other
applications, I dare to say, and we know which program is the most
important one (its name begins with `E') :-)

> All that said, this debate is off-topic so we should probably stop
> there.

If it's uninteresting for others on the list and/or you're bored, I
agree.  I was only wondering about the reason for your decision; now I
that I know it, we can put an end to the thread or continue off-list.