Fwd: what is the reason for not making epiphany the default
eric.dunbar at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 02:36:32 GMT 2006
On 1/5/06, Robin Sonefors <ozamosi at blinkenlights.se> wrote:
> tor 2006-01-05 klockan 09:22 -0800 skrev Corey Burger:
> > (Putting my Userful hat on)
> > For a quick perspective, we at Userful ship Epiphany and not Firefox.
> > I should note for those who don't know, 95% of the users who use our
> > stuff don't even know they are using Linux, let alone Fedora Core,
> > GNOME or Epiphany.
> > What does this mean for Ubuntu? I think a webbrowser is a webbrowser
> > to most users. Your average grandma is never going to install any of
> > the 9 million plugins for Firefox that are out there and thus doesn't
> > need that capability. But they do want a consistent print/open dialog,
> > etc.
> I agree completely with the previous speaker. Consistency is one of the
> most important aspects of Gnome (the way I see it). Epiphany uses the
> same browser engine, and can thus do it's job as well as Firefox: that
> is, show webpages. That is really all the browser-features you use. On
> top of that, it also does it the Right Way with respect to Gnome.
I did recently write "consitency, consistency, consistency" with
regards to the FF URL bar ;=P), however, I'm willing to make an
exception in this case. FireFox does an excellent job of being a web
browser (vs. Epiphany).
I tried Epiphany (granted, that was in 5.10 when it was in beta) a few
months back and was thoroughly underwhelmed. It didn't seem to have
particularly good tab handling (did it even have tabs?) and was (in my
experience) quite unstable.
Until Epiphany becomes _undisputably_ BETTER than FF, FF should remain
the default. It's not good enough for Epiphany to be FF's equal -- it
has to do its job BETTER than FF!!!
More information about the ubuntu-devel