Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Battle Brews Over Firefox In Ubuntu 8.10

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

  • he_the_great
    replied
    Originally posted by Vadi View Post
    Because Iceweasel is one dumb idea that nobody knows about: http://www.google.com/trends?q=firefox%2C+iceweasel

    (yes, you might not see it on the graph)

    For comparison, even ubuntu doesn't scale up: http://www.google.com/trends?q=firef...ate=all&sort=0
    How is it dumb? I don't have a EULA to click yes to. Who needs to search for Iceweasel? I already know it is Firefox and so everything I'm interested in would be under a search for Firefox and not Iceweasel.

    Leave a comment:


  • he_the_great
    replied
    Originally posted by puelocesar View Post
    "User friendlyness -or- Brand protection"

    I have to disagree, placing something like "Iceweasel" instead of Firefox would be very bad to the end user, because Firefox is a known brand, and people like Firefox. When these people that know Firefox but doesn't know these trademark issues install Ubuntu will just look and say: "What the hell is this iceweasel?" and even if these people understands later that it's just firefox with other name, the initial impact will be negative for Ubuntu.

    AND, in other hand, many extensions will just not install if you are using something with a name different then Firefox. Downloading a .jar, unpacking, changing the version string in a xml, packing again, and installing manually isn't a good thing for everyone...
    Yes name branding is very important when you are trying to convince someone to switch and the best you can come up with is, hey they use Firefox. Yes, people are going to go, "WTF, where is Firefox its cross-platform why don't I see it in the repos." I did the same when it left my Debian (or before it left, but the upgrade was to Iceweasel). The solution is have Iceweasel by default and keep Firefox and their EULA in the repo for download.

    I have several extensions installed, and the only ones I've had a problem with came from Google, and it was prevented long before Iceweasel tried to install it (ie a javascript check as to what browser I was using). Looking at the packaging information, the GUID is what identifies the app, I do not know if Iceweasel changes this.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vadi
    replied
    Because Iceweasel is one dumb idea that nobody knows about: http://www.google.com/trends?q=firefox%2C+iceweasel

    (yes, you might not see it on the graph)

    For comparison, even ubuntu doesn't scale up: http://www.google.com/trends?q=firef...ate=all&sort=0

    Leave a comment:


  • Zhick
    replied
    Seriously, the Ubuntu-guys are already taking everything else from debian, why not also use iceweasel?
    Oh and:
    Firefox, what's not to love about this open-source web browser?
    GTK. GTK is ugly, especially the file-save dialog. Thanks god they've picked up work on a qt-port again.

    Leave a comment:


  • puelocesar
    replied
    "User friendlyness -or- Brand protection"

    I have to disagree, placing something like "Iceweasel" instead of Firefox would be very bad to the end user, because Firefox is a known brand, and people like Firefox. When these people that know Firefox but doesn't know these trademark issues install Ubuntu will just look and say: "What the hell is this iceweasel?" and even if these people understands later that it's just firefox with other name, the initial impact will be negative for Ubuntu.

    AND, in other hand, many extensions will just not install if you are using something with a name different then Firefox. Downloading a .jar, unpacking, changing the version string in a xml, packing again, and installing manually isn't a good thing for everyone...

    Leave a comment:


  • Vadi
    replied
    It's a brand protection fail, because you can protect the brand without having an EULA.

    See Canonical's Ubuntu brand. They protect it well, without an eula.

    Leave a comment:


  • bruno08
    replied
    Choice time

    How many read the EULA?

    Choose your way - choose your path:

    User friendlyness -or- Brand protection

    Leave a comment:


  • puelocesar
    replied
    Common just press OK on the damn EULA and fuckoff... There are SO many things to care about Ubuntu rather than removing a EULA that opens only on the first time you install the software...

    Leave a comment:


  • Vadi
    replied
    Originally posted by DanL View Post
    If the heads of Ubuntu have any sense, they'll switch to Iceweasel/Icedove.
    If they have any sense, they won't do that. "Ubuntu Web Browser" as someone suggested on launchpad makes much more sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • yoshi314
    replied
    People are used to it.
    the ones that use windows often are. others - not quite.

    i thought for a while i accidentally installed windows on my box when i saw that eula box :]

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X