| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jebba
|
 Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:49 pm Post subject: epiphany vs firefox |
 |
|
Anyone used epiphany lately? Any thoughts?
A number of people on fedora-devel have said to hell with FF, epiphany is actually quite nice. And it's smaller on disk, so I think that's neat.
I'm going to start test driving it to see how it fares...Check it out. :)
-Jeff
|
|
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jebba,
I'm fairly new to Blag (a Fedora-based distro) but under Ubuntu you needed Firefox in your system before you could even install Epiphany. Is it the same under Fedora? Also, Epiphany doesn't have near the extensions available as Firefox.
You might want to check out..
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
about a browser called Iceweasel (a Firefox clone).
P.S.
When do you anticipate the next release for Blag?
|
|
|
|
logicmaster
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:50 am Post subject: Re: epiphany vs firefox |
|
|
| jebba wrote: | Anyone used epiphany lately? Any thoughts?
A number of people on fedora-devel have said to hell with FF, epiphany is actually quite nice. And it's smaller on disk, so I think that's neat.
I'm going to start test driving it to see how it fares...Check it out. :)
-Jeff |
hmm... i hope theres gonna be a flash / java /mplayer plugin support for epipany :) its a funny name by the way :)
|
_________________
WWJD (What Would Jebba Do) :) |
|
|
noldrin
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trespasser wrote: |
about a browser called Iceweasel (a Firefox clone).
|
Iceweasel is Firefox on debian. They basically compile Firefox without the trademarked images and name.
|
|
|
|
Caraibes
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've installed all the Epiphany stuff this morning, will play with it a bit, and post my feedback...
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| noldrin wrote: | | Trespasser wrote: |
about a browser called Iceweasel (a Firefox clone).
|
Iceweasel is Firefox on debian. They basically compile Firefox without the trademarked images and name. |
They're talking about Iceweasel over at Ubuntu Forum but it being solely Debian...well, I don't know about that. It appears to be open to anyone who wants to use it.
Last night I installed Epiphany plus its extensions and all I can say is...it's far from being Firefox. I give it a big thumbs down. I find it very bland and colorless plus the extensions available are terrible (at least IMHO).
On a positive note, Epiphany does run independent of Firefox (you can delete Firefox if you wish) unlike in Ubuntu.
I could live with Epiphany if that is the direction Jebba chooses but I would prefer something more configurable.
|
|
|
|
Caraibes
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am now on Epiphany... Not too bad, it's pretty basic...
It seems to behave just like the browser part of Seamonkey (which I also have on this machine...), that means that you can't go back one page with hitting "backspace" on the keyboard, and you can't open a bookmark on a new tab with a right click... First, you have to open a new tab, and then, select your bookmark...
It's ok, but it has that sweet retro-feeling, very 1990's... I don't (personnaly) think it can ever stand in front of Firefox or Opera...
Will explore more, I might learn some new tricks...
|
|
|
|
noldrin
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Caraibes wrote: | | It seems to behave just like the browser part of Seamonkey (which I also have on this machine...), that means that you can't go back one page with hitting "backspace" on the keyboard |
I can't stand it when hitting backspace makes the brower go back one page. That's the bane of my web browser experience. I can't tell you how many times I'm trying to entire something into a field and somehow a backspace takes me back a page. And on stupid webpages I'll lose my entered info.
|
|
|
|
jebba
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In epiphany, firefox, mozilla, you can hit alt-left-arrow to go to previous page.
|
|
|
|
ewl
|
|
|
ewl
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just downloaded and ran (all you have to do is untar and run the executable) iceweasel. It looks and feels exactly like firefox, but without the offending firefox logo. Works great under Blag: http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/download/iceweasel-1.5.0.7-g1-i386.tar.bz2
I think this is going to be my web browser of choice.
|
_________________
Ed LaBonte |
|
|
john maclean
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| noldrin wrote: | | Caraibes wrote: | | It seems to behave just like the browser part of Seamonkey (which I also have on this machine...), that means that you can't go back one page with hitting "backspace" on the keyboard |
I can't stand it when hitting backspace makes the brower go back one page. That's the bane of my web browser experience. I can't tell you how many times I'm trying to entire something into a field and somehow a backspace takes me back a page. And on stupid webpages I'll lose my entered info. |
I tend to use these keybindings.
<ctrl> <k> takes the cursor to the "search" bar at the top right hand corner. Then just type for query
<ctrl> <l> takes the cursor to the address bar
<ctrl> <h>opens the history pane on the left hand side of the browser
<ctrl> <t> open a new tabb for browsing
|
_________________
We need shells, lots of shells.
London, GMT +1 |
|
|
stevo32
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
pfe1223 accidentally posted this in a seperate topic, here it is:
| Quote: | I have been using Epiphany for the past five or six months, and I really like it. Epiphany is smaller than FF, it goes well with Gnome for obvious reason, and it renders all web pages just fine. I don't have much use for extensions, so I can't comment on that.
The Fedora Project is closely keeping its eye on the Mozilla debate, and I would expect them to make a change. The most important thing at play here are the ramifications to RHEL. Mozilla is now only supporting FF for about a year and a half, then they just tell you to update. The whole idea of stability (RHEL or Debian) implies that applications/kernel/whatever do not change. Instead, the bug fixes are backported. Enterprise customers pay good money with the expectation that their software is stable, secure, and up to date. Waiting for Mozilla to approve the backports can take a long time, especially when you consider that the following companies have long(-ish) support cycles: Red Hat, Debian, Suse, Mandriva, Ubuntu, any of the BSD's. Why would RHEL customers continue to buy this product of Suse manages to have their FF backports approved first? Why should they be forced to upgrade to a new browser that does not have the stability of a tried and tested, previous version? What would happen if Ubuntu struck a deal with Mozilla to approve all of their backports before any other OS? The change from "mozilla.org" to "mozilla.com" was more than superficial. They are definately taking on more of a corporate mentality.
Of course, the most logical solution for Debian is to take the official FF build, use a different set of logos, and move it to the "non-free" repositories. The Debian Team has decided against this for whatever reason. It remains to be seen what will happen to FF, but Epiphany is a great alternative, and may become even better if the enterprise linux distributions start to aid development. |
|
_________________
E-mail me at s.clement@localhost (replace localhost with sympatico.ca) or stevo32@localhost (replace localhost with blagblagblag.org). |
|
|
pfe1223
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:07 pm Post subject: Thanks |
|
|
Stevo32,
Thanks for moving my misplaced post.
|
|
|
|
Caraibes
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:11 pm Post subject: 1A |
|
|
I am presently using Epiphany (on my Xubuntu Dapper laptop...), and it seems to be doing just fine... Indeed, Firefox 1.5.0.8 has been freezing quite often with about 5 to 6 tabs open...
Funny thing with the *buntu repos, there's no Seamonkey ! So I also installed Mozilla 1.7, but using Epiphany seems just fine... It has Adblock !!! This is nice...
I was thinking of that thread, so this is why I posted, despite not being on my Blag desktops...
I am wondering if it is lighter than Mozilla browser... Or maybe Galeon is lighter ?
This is because my laptop runs on a 496 Mhz Celeron, with 192 megs of ram...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
