xxxterm/xombrero

[PCMan]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:30 AM, PCMan <pcman.tw at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Yorvyk <yorvik.ubunto at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On 10/10/12 21:39, ∅ wrote:
>>>
>>> Not relevant to the aforementioned wiki page, as this is way upstream
>>> still, but Debian has made progress on the package on their end [1]
>>> but note this does not mean it has yet landed in the official repos,
>>> as there is more work to be done.
>>>
>>> In response to some of the comments, I should note that the browser
>>> has bookmarks, history, sessions, plugins (in the sense of
>>> audio/video plugins like Flash, not necessarily some of the fancy
>>> deals available for Firefox and Chromium e.g. VideoDownloadHelper in
>>>  Firefox or Angry Birds in Chromium), JavaScript, certificate, and
>>> cookie support.
>>>
>>> I'd sort of argue that if we need more than that, we might as well
>>> replace LXDE with Gnome and Unity, but that's just my 2¢.
>>>
>>> wxl
>>>
>>> [1] http://mentors.debian.net/package/xombrero
>>>
>>>
>> It may have all those features, but it's not really user-friendly in
>> it's current state.  With the provision of a reasonable mouse driven
>> interface, though, it could be a good alternative to Chromium or Firefox.
>> Anybody been using Midori lately, that seems to be quite good as well.
>>

I tried Midori recently.
It's stability is greatly improved and crashes happen less often.
Regarding to performance, however, it cannot compete with chromium at all.
Using webkit does not guarantee performance. Webkit-gtk is not as good
as Chromium.
In Midori, when opening several tabs at the same time, the UI just
hangs for several seconds.
In chromium, there is nearly no blocking of UI at any time.
In Midori, this kind of blocks are quite frequent, especially when
multiple tabs are opened or some heavy pages are being loaded.
Chromium apparently has better multi-threading & multi-process
handling and the UI is smoother, too.
I'd still suggest that we keep Chromium.
Just like previously mentioned, I'd like to stress the issue again.
Browser is one of the biggest security hole of modern operating systems.
The nature and complexity of web browsers make them more vulnerable
than other general desktop applications.
Stability and security fixes for the browsers are very crucial for the OS.
The risks of using less famous browsers are slower security fixes and
poorer maintenance due to lack of man power.
Most of the time it does not matter if you use a less well-maintained
text editor, window manager, or a terminal emulator.
It does matter and will cause potentially severe security/privacy
problems if you use a less well-maintained browsers that crashes
frequently.

For this obvious reason, I'd rather sacrifice little performance gain
and to get better security and bug fixes by using a very
well-maintained browser supported by big companies even if it's
slightly heavier.

Just my two cents.