Fwd: what is the reason for not making epiphany the defaultbrowser?

James Livingston doclivingston at gmail.com
Tue Jan 10 07:14:18 GMT 2006

On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 21:26 -0500, Eric Dunbar wrote:
> 1. The lack of a Google bar (or, heaven forbid, another search engine)
> is a show stopper! Nearly every web browser worth its salt now has the
> search bar smack dab beside the URL bar!

Epiphany does this differently: type it into the location entry, and
then select "Search the Web" from the drop-down menu. Some people prefer
this, some don't.

If you really want a Google search entry, it's easy to add one (oor any
smart bookmark for that matter), just drag the smart bookmark to the
toolbar. It was more difficult in older versions, but that's been fixed.

> 2. And, re-arrangeable tabs. What's up with that? Yeah, it's a neat
> gimmick and, perhaps with time I could find a use for them, BUT, BUT,
> BUT how is *that* going to make web browsing easier for a newbie, or
> for the _majority_ of users?

Once again this either annoying or a must-have feature, depending on you
personal taste. Firefox 1.5 does this too, so I don't think it can
really count against Epiphany.

> 3. Menu entries are poorly labelled.
> I know web browsers like the back of my hand (and their preferences
> settings) and I couldn't guess what "View:Popup Windows" was supposed
> to do. If I select it does it bring up a popup window of sorts? Does
> it _allow_ or _disallow_ popup windows?
> More appropriate would be "Prevent Popup Windows". A check mark would
> signify that popup windows are being prevented. No check mark would
> mean they're allowed.

I'm not sure about earlier versions, but in Epiphany 1.9 the menu item
is a toggle item (with a check mark). The sense is reversed, so that
being checked allows rather than prevents popups, though.

> Likewise, "Edit:Toolbars". What does that do? Display _more_ toolbars
> (because of the plural)? Customize Toolbars would be more appropriate!

Displaying toolbars is one of the things it lets you do, but I agree
that it could be clearer. The best thing to do is file a bug about it
(in fact, this post has inspired me to file a few about some Firefox
menu items).

> 4. Toolbar icons are pretty amateurish. Not a major issue but they do
> look like they were thrown together in a few minutes in GIMP.

Epiphany uses the GTK icon theme, so if you don't like them either
change your icon theme or complain to it's author. Again this is
personal taste: some people like the ability to have the Firefox icons
different from other applications, some people hate it because they
can't find a Firefox theme that has the same icons as their desktop.

Of you complaints, Firefox has one, two are design choices which are a
matter of personal opinion and one could be trivial to fix. While
Epiphany may not be better than Firefox, I'd also say that Firefox may
not be better than Epiphany - the major differences are design choices
that suit some people and not others.


James "Doc" Livingston
Every one is entitled to their own opinion. But not their own facts
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20060110/90814f1d/attachment.pgp

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list