Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maxthon Web Browser Being Ported To Linux

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Maxthon Web Browser Being Ported To Linux

    Phoronix: Maxthon Web Browser Being Ported To Linux

    The Maxthon freeware web-browser that up to now has been available for Windows and OS X on the desktop is in the process of being ported to the Linux desktop. Maxthon has received high rankings in the past on Windows, but how well will this Trident/WebKit-based browser fair on Linux?..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ3MDI

  • #2
    Freeware web browser. Thank, but I don't need such crap.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yet another browser

      Diversity is good, Maxthon has been praised (and has been leading html5 compatibility tests for quite some time - html5test.com), but if I want my data sync'ed in the proprietary cloud I already have Google Chrome.

      Aside from this I am plenty happy with Firefox + Chromium + one lightweight browser (Rekonq, Midori).

      As for mobile browsers I admit Firefox was slow to get up to speed, but the main point is I am more confident about where my data is.

      Comment


      • #4
        Fuck off

        Maxthon can take their proprietary browser and fuck off!

        Don't want no stinky proprietary software on Linux.
        Just fuck off!

        Source or gtfo!

        Comment


        • #5
          Rather interested to see how they intend to get IE's Trident engine working on Linux.

          Looking forward to testing out the browser when it's ready.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
            Rather interested to see how they intend to get IE's Trident engine working on Linux.

            Looking forward to testing out the browser when it's ready.
            Trident is only in Windows version

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by uid313 View Post
              Maxthon can take their proprietary browser and fuck off!

              Don't want no stinky proprietary software on Linux.
              Just fuck off!

              Source or gtfo!
              *sigh* As usual, WHY DO YOU CARE? I know that you personally will not take advantage of it being open source. I'm sure you won't edit a single line of code, I'm sure you won't compile it for another architecture, I'm sure you have no motive to redistribute the software yourself, and I'm sure you have no legal reasons to need it open source. Of every single time you bitched about closed source software coming to linux, free or not, you have yet to provide even 1 good reason why something MUST be open source if it's on linux. Linux itself is free and open source but even Linus Torvalds himself said you are free to SELL it in a commercialized manner. It's not like this maxthon browser is capitalizing off of linux. If it did, that would be much more of a "fuck off" move than simply closing the source to something they hold the rights to.

              Comment


              • #8
                I have read that Maxthon's user base is primarily in China. The porting of Maxthon to Linux may be a sign that Linux's popularity in China is growing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                  *sigh* As usual, WHY DO YOU CARE? I know that you personally will not take advantage of it being open source. I'm sure you won't edit a single line of code, I'm sure you won't compile it for another architecture, I'm sure you have no motive to redistribute the software yourself, and I'm sure you have no legal reasons to need it open source. Of every single time you bitched about closed source software coming to linux, free or not, you have yet to provide even 1 good reason why something MUST be open source if it's on linux. Linux itself is free and open source but even Linus Torvalds himself said you are free to SELL it in a commercialized manner. It's not like this maxthon browser is capitalizing off of linux. If it did, that would be much more of a "fuck off" move than simply closing the source to something they hold the rights to.
                  Why do you care to admonish? If I can't compile a web browser, I'm not using it. It doesn't matter if it's allowed, and I'll speak out against it as I see fit.

                  I'll use a proprietary video driver (fglrx) because I have to. It's simply the best choice for me. I have a few commercial games on Linux, I'll make an exception for things like that... I don't refuse to use proprietary software if there's some clear benefit to me. Everything else on my system is compiled and optimized for my hardware and yes, I often do edit a few lines of code.

                  My web browsers are something I pay special attention to... probably the most significant programs I use. I sure as Hell don't have to eat someone else's dog food for that.

                  I agree. Source code or fuck off, Maxthon. Moreover, they can fuck off anyway as far as I am concerned. That browser was just a silly front end to Internet Explorer. What do we need that shit ported to Linux/Webkit for? (There are plenty of free webkit based browsers already)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    So what? We already have proprietary browsers on Linux - Chrome, Opera... one more won't make a difference and Firefox is the best anyway.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Grogan View Post
                      Why do you care to admonish?
                      ...
                      I agree. Source code or fuck off, Maxthon. Moreover, they can fuck off anyway as far as I am concerned. That browser was just a silly front end to Internet Explorer. What do we need that shit ported to Linux/Webkit for? (There are plenty of free webkit based browsers already)
                      Somewhat of a hypocritical post, questioning my admonishment when you yourself are doing that very thing. I'm simply sick of hearing uid313 making the same un-quantified demand and acting like that opinion should reflect all linux users. There is nothing HARMFUL about adding a proprietary piece of software in userland. If this was a driver or something kernel level then I would understand the aggravation, but even then, the average user as an individual will not take advantage of drivers being open source. But, software like drivers have a chain reaction of issues if something changes and breaks it. If closed-source kernel-level code is closed source, then we at at the mercy of the software owners to fix that code. While the average user won't bother fixing it, the point is SOMEBODY can. However, when it comes to userland software such as Maxthon, it's simply inconvenient if it breaks or doesn't work on some misc architecture. We don't NEED the software at all, and we're not obligated to support it if we don't want to. But telling userland software to fuck off is more counterproductive than anything.
                      Last edited by schmidtbag; 09-27-2013, 01:23 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                        *sigh* As usual, WHY DO YOU CARE? I know that you personally will not take advantage of it being open source. I'm sure you won't edit a single line of code, I'm sure you won't compile it for another architecture, I'm sure you have no motive to redistribute the software yourself, and I'm sure you have no legal reasons to need it open source. Of every single time you bitched about closed source software coming to linux, free or not, you have yet to provide even 1 good reason why something MUST be open source if it's on linux. Linux itself is free and open source but even Linus Torvalds himself said you are free to SELL it in a commercialized manner. It's not like this maxthon browser is capitalizing off of linux. If it did, that would be much more of a "fuck off" move than simply closing the source to something they hold the rights to.
                        Maxthon isn't selling anything.
                        I have no problem with anyone selling anything.
                        Selling software is fine by me!
                        I would gladly pay money for free open source software.

                        My problem is with proprietary closed source software.
                        Money is not an issue.
                        The issue is freedom.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Freedom means that users are able to run whatever software they want in their OS. If Linux made it impossible to run proprietary software, then Linux itself would no longer be free software, by definition. To be considered free software, the software must allow the user to use it in any way they see fit, with no extra restrictions (other than copyleft, and copyleft doesn't restrict usage, only distribution).

                          Besides, Linux needs proprietary software. It'd be great if we lived in a world where all software is open source, but that's not the case. I see it in practical terms: in order for Linux to gain more mainstream success, it needs to attract proprietary software titles, because many times people stick to windows because they can't get software X elsewhere. "Can I use photoshop on Linux? Can I play <the latest boring FPS game>?" The latter is getting fixed thanks to Steam, but the former is still a long way from happening. And maybe you don't care about Linux getting more mainstream adoption, but the only way to attract proper support from hardware vendors is for them to see Linux as more than just a tiny niche OS with no real marketshare.

                          No one still forces you to use any of the proprietary software. But it's good that it's there for those who want/need it, because it ultimately also benefits all of the open source community, by making Linux a stronger platform overall.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dee. View Post
                            Can I use photoshop on Linux?
                            Newer version of Adobe Photoshop is part of Creative Cloud meaning subscription only unless someone is willing to pirate a copy.
                            That is an example of application Linux system does not need.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by dee. View Post
                              Freedom means that users are able to run whatever software they want in their OS. If Linux made it impossible to run proprietary software, then Linux itself would no longer be free software, by definition. To be considered free software, the software must allow the user to use it in any way they see fit, with no extra restrictions (other than copyleft, and copyleft doesn't restrict usage, only distribution).

                              Besides, Linux needs proprietary software. It'd be great if we lived in a world where all software is open source, but that's not the case. I see it in practical terms: in order for Linux to gain more mainstream success, it needs to attract proprietary software titles, because many times people stick to windows because they can't get software X elsewhere. "Can I use photoshop on Linux? Can I play <the latest boring FPS game>?" The latter is getting fixed thanks to Steam, but the former is still a long way from happening. And maybe you don't care about Linux getting more mainstream adoption, but the only way to attract proper support from hardware vendors is for them to see Linux as more than just a tiny niche OS with no real marketshare.

                              No one still forces you to use any of the proprietary software. But it's good that it's there for those who want/need it, because it ultimately also benefits all of the open source community, by making Linux a stronger platform overall.
                              I use Linux and it works for me.
                              I don't care about Linux market share.
                              If other people want to use it fine, if they don't, then fine with me, I don't care what other people use.
                              I don't go around trying to recruit people to Linux. Usually, I never tell anyone that I use Linux.

                              Windows is hundred times bigger than Linux. Yet Linux have more free software than Windows.
                              Why is this?
                              If Linux were to have greater proprietary influence with more proprietary software, then the result may be less free software.

                              The free software is the part of Linux that appeals to me.
                              I can run an operating system and everything can be free open source software. That is very appealing to me.

                              If Linux wasn't free software, or the Linux software eco system wasn't so strongly centered and focused around free software, then I probably wouldn't use Linux.

                              The great thing about Linux is free software.
                              Technically Windows is a superior operating system. It is more much stable, crashes less often, everything just works, you don't have audio glitches, the graphics performance is better, there is much less bugs and regressions, etc.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X