160
votes
|
|
213
0
53
|
|
|
|
|
Propose your solution
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
|
|
Remember that Ubuntu could call iceweasel easily something "Web Browser" like gcalctool is called "Calculator" and there are many other good examples. Would make sense and the end user would be happy. :)
|
|
Remco
wrote on the 14 Sep 08 at 20:22
|
|
|
Iceweasel should just be called Iceweasel Web Browser (well I don't like the name, but it should have a real name). A name is important to be able to talk about it. If you call it "web browser" you can't talk about the product anymore, because every web browser is a "web browser".
Maybe it should be called Ubufox ;)
I prefer to adopt Epiphany though. It has better integration with Gnome. Firefox is really bad with theming, accessibility and other things that Epiphany does right without effort.
|
|
kiersie
wrote on the 14 Sep 08 at 20:31
|
|
|
|
I preffer Epiphany as defealt but i dont use many extensions
|
Biornus
(Idea reviewer)
wrote on the 14 Sep 08 at 21:09
|
|
|
|
Epiphany when it adopts Webkit.
|
|
|
I'm fine with Firefox. Do not fix what is not broken.
As for Iceweasel, I had unpleasant experience with it. These Debian people managed to change even user agent to avoid word Firebox. So, lots of sites no longer recognize this as Firefox. And RENDERING POORLY. If you want to provide POOR user experience, that's way to go! I'm preferring Ubuntu over Debian exactly because it does not provides such quirks like Iceweasel. And you're offering to broke this? Then, Ubuntu will be half-baked crap, just as Debian. Mozilla requires certain trademark policy and this is for good reason. Taken a look on Iceweasel and now I got idea why Mozilla forbids to name something Firefox without patches approval. Surely, Iceweasel provides poor user experience. So it does not have to be named Firefox. Firefox is known to be a good browser. Iceweasel rather tends to use moron defaults which will lead to poor user experience (yeah, I'm about user-agent string).
|
|
|
@PowerUser
>Do not fix what is not broken.
There is a forced EULA. Hence, you can use all of ubuntu unrestricted without any legal boundries, except for Firefox.
That is a problem. Maybe not the pirating home-user type, but it pretty much kills corporate adoption.
Perhaps not at the current scale, but after firefox .. a lot of other vendors are likely to go this way as well. Except to have to accept 5+ EULA's with Ubuntu 9.04 .. and perhaps 20+ with Ubuntu 10.04 .. etc. ..
|
|
|
|
Can we call it "Ubuntu Web Browser" as discussed elsewhere?
|
|
|
> There is a forced EULA.
So what? Wanna to have absolute freedom? Go use Debian and enjoy by all it's quirks and poor user experience. Iceweasel is just one of these Debian quirks and has user-unfriendly defaults which will cause users to have much more headache than Firefox does. Total freedom has it's own price and many users are not willing to pay such high price just for avoiding clicking one button. I'm rather to prefer balanced solution. OS which rather prefers to use free software and as much freedom as possible. As long as this does not leads to poor user experience. Otherwise I do not need such OS at all.
> but it pretty much kills corporate adoption
Huh? I know dozen of large corporations using Firefox. Even windows ones with paranoid lawyers. They're fine with EULAs. So, stop talking stupid things. And if you're about deployment, stop talking nonsense again. Corporations are using very own methods like writing prepared disk image to HDD directly in minutes. EULA... hmm... user of machine may have to accept it once. What's wrong?
> and perhaps 20+ with Ubuntu 10.04 .. etc.
My view: because of this, system should just display ONE license dialog box for system and associated programs during install or after install. Surely, GPL statement and other related packages licenses. Including Firefox EULA if needed. User have to accept 'em all before using system but can do it as a single act. So, 20 licenses? Ok. You have to read 'em all. But to accept only once.
Using Iceweasel will trash user experience so IMHO not an option. Nobody needs yet another Debian, half-baked and user-unfriendly. As for me, good solution is to negotiate this issue with Mozilla somehow and find suitable solution. Not just stupid rants like "use , because sucks" with total ignorance of consequences of such decisions.
|
|
|
|
Seriously: Mozilla is just killing themselves by forcing a EULA on any Linux platform.
|
|
|
|
I think this is a bad idea though. Firefox is a strong brand that attracts a lot of users.
|
|
|
I think that defaulting to Iceweasel / Epiphany should be on the same vote. The replacement should be decided now.
Right now 60% of users could vote that Firefox should not be the default, but their vote is split between two choices and so keeping Firefox looks the most popular.
And to those that talk about brand attraction, no one is suggesting that Firefox not be in the repos, just not the default installed browser.
|
|
Auzy
wrote on the 15 Sep 08 at 01:42
|
|
|
This is kind of similar to http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/5372/ (which at the time got -30)
Funny how once again, people only give a crap when other problems happen. Hell, if I suggested EULA would be forced at the time, people would have laughed at me.
This is evidence of why people should vote on ideas based on their merit, because at the moment, the logic being used for voting is very short sighted, non-existent, or its a "me-me-me" thing. You guys need to start thinking more broad/general, or Ubuntu's only claim to fame will be because its free, not because its the best.
|
|
|
Big +1 to this. Don't know about the rest of you, but one big reason why the missus and I switched to Ubuntu (and Free software in general) is because of the lack of obnoxious, abusive EULAs that require every software user to be a lawyer.
There's nothing wrong with having branded 'Firefox' in the repos, but for the default, clean, user experience we should do something similar to IceWeasel. It should be named 'Web Browser' or something utterly obvious like that though.
|
|
|
I don't understand what Mozilla hopes to accomplish with the EULA. 90% of the people who agree to the thing will have:
1 - Not read the thing at all
2 - Not understood the thing at all
Then theres the rest of us who avoid restricted software as a matter of principal. I think Ubuntu needs to make a stand on this and tell Mozilla that their product will simply be excluded by default.
IceWeasel can easily be re-branded to "Ubuntu Web Browser" and does not inhibit the user's freedom while keeping compatibility.
Its not just about this particular issue, agreeing to this sets dangerous precedent. Later, if the 'foo' project wished to add the same nonsense there would be the "well, you did it for Mozilla!" argument. Please nip this sort of foolishness in the bud.
|
|
Celarnor
wrote on the 15 Sep 08 at 04:26
|
|
|
In my eyes, Firefox is no longer valid for being in the repositories if it places any requirements on the end user. Free software should never, EVER, place any kind of restrictions on the end user.
Keeping Firefox would trash the user experience and eliminate the 'free' from 'free software', forcing users to go elsewhere if they want to keep with that ideal.
Trademark issues should be dealt with at the distribution level, NEVER the end user level. This nonsense, if Mozilla insists on it, should be handled in a separate LICENSE file, not forced upon the end user.
|
|
|
Firefox is currently in a free software repository, and if it is true that it is not free enough, then we have a problem. The software is in the wrong place, and we are misrepresenting what it is. To let things remain as they are is to remain ignorant of an inconsistency.
Put Firefox in a different repository and pre-install a rebranded version of Firefox (the Iceweasel route). The users get the same functionality they've always had, those who are concerned about the free software issues are satisfied, and everyone goes home happy.
I like the suggestion to rename it something obvious, like "Ubuntu Web Browser". Use the rebranding as an opportunity -- improve usability!
|
|
pyrates
wrote on the 15 Sep 08 at 07:06
|
|
|
|
wtf? how does removing firefox, a browser which they know of in windows, and replacing it with IceWeasel, a browser they know nothing of, help the end user? Tell me and I'll change my vote to +1. Otherwise for now I'm voting this down. What a stupid idea. This is where open source software fails, when it is made political.
|
|
Pasto
wrote on the 15 Sep 08 at 07:13
|
|
|
Was Firefox actually free software before the EULA? I heard it was only open source, nonfree.
Ontopic, drop firefox. Ubuntu does not need this as default.
+1
I hate EULA's.
|
|
Slydder
wrote on the 15 Sep 08 at 08:22
|
|
|
There is no need to fork Firefox (is shit) as Iceweasel is already the standard solution. If they don't drop Firefox for iceweasel then it's time to fork Ubuntu to keep Ubuntu what it started out to be. Simple as that.
|
|
|
|
I would prefer to use firefox without an EULA but let's show Mozilla that we would rather use IceWeasel than force everybody to accept some EULA.
|
|
|
Slydder : so just make your own browser.
IceWeasel could be a suicide for ubuntu. For me, it means : sorry, I will not use neither talk about ubuntu to people who want to switch to linux or install it besides windows.
Free software zealots are really blind to computer user reality...
|
|
|
We have to stifle such things! We have to show Mozilla that we cannot accept this crap. We have to set a sign, also for other companies!
I really can't understand why Mozilla is doing that, it is clearly the wrong way.
An EULA is not compatible with Ubuntu. Please take iceweasel as the new default browser called "Web Browser". Like everyone knows that "Video Player" is actually totem.
And please do not create a new unnecessary browser called abrowser (awful name btw.). There is already the great icewesel.
No one will ever read this crap, no one will ever understand this crap and ***only ~1% of the population*** will be allowed to use Ubuntu any more, because if you do not understand everything 100% you are not allowed to use it. It's easy like that. It's the only way. Please decide wise Mark. Set a sign.
|
|
|
|
Go unbranded, call it FreeFox.
|
|
begemot
wrote on the 17 Sep 08 at 00:53
|
|
|
PowerUser is from Mozilla for sure!
Otherwise, how normal concerned person can encourage us to accept EULA in the distribution of FreeSoftware?!
slashdotaccount:
"No one will ever read this crap, no one will ever understand this crap and ***only ~1% of the population*** will be allowed to use Ubuntu any more, because if you do not understand everything 100% you are not allowed to use it."
tinkertim:
"1 - Not read the thing at all
2 - Not understood the thing at all"
You are absolutely right, guys!
But in addition, it's only USA country out there, where this crappy paper will make any sense, in almost ALL of the other countries in the World people wouldn't read EULA, because it haven't juridical power!
|
|
Craig73
wrote on the 3 Oct 08 at 18:00
|
|
|
Ummmm... how about talking with Mozilla... really, we are all in this together.
-1 : FireFox, like OpenOffice, is a really strong brand that helps sell this distribution/platform and it all most users really understand (or care to)
|
Post your comment
|
Ubuntuforums.org thread #919444
