Announce: GNOME-Fx 0.10.1 "GNOME Firefox themes"

Can I uninstall FireFox and Install Epiphany?

Yes

Or Epiphany needs Mozilla/FireFox to be installed?

Yes and no. Epiphany needs Mozilla to be installed because it uses Mozilla's HTML renderer. You do not need firefox to install epiphany.

To install epiphany and uninstall firefox, just open Computer->System Config->Synaptic Package Manager and do it from there.

For the case of spreadsheets, at least, Gnumeric really is a lot better than OpenOffice Calc. I would hate to drop it in the interest of being standardized. Similarily, for light text editing, Abiword is much snappier and easier to work with than OOWriter.

Also, the danger of saying "OK, good enough, let's drop development" can be clearly seen with IE. It really has been good enough for many people for years now, but meanwhile, new ideas have been percolating elsewhere, and today IE is a pretty clumsy, and crusty application compared to the alternatives.

Your argument has two pretty enormous flaws:

First, while open source indeed does not mean endless resources, remember that you can't really direct volunteer resources. The people who work on Epiphany do it because they believe in Epiphany. They do not believe in Firefox, and they don't really feel that strongly about any other program, so you'd effectively volunteers by dumping Epiphany. We're not a company here, we're a community.

Secondly, since when was "good enough" enough? Firefox is gaining popularity exactly because Internet Explorer *isn't* "good enough". People thought it was for years, but Firefox is showing them that there is a heck of a lot more innovation possible.

Epiphany, being an integrated browser, is capable of a whole lot more. (Konqueror is, too: it goes an entirely different direction from Epiphany, but it really is an awesome application that Firefox cannot mimic.) We can take advantage of an entire infrastructure that Firefox can't. Not only that, but we can design a HIG-compliant browser, which Firefox developers won't. As GNOME becomes more and more integrated, Firefox will stick out more and more as a sore thumb.

While you have some good points, I also disagree with you in some points. I agree that you cannot tell Epiphany developers what to work on and that they are only expressing their personal vision of what a browser should be, and that is great. However, a lot of people, myself included, feel hostility toward the Epiphany project because the spin and marketing job that actually does try to peddle Epiphany as the browser for everyone in gnome and that it is somehow better than Firefox or galeon. That is a very hard sell since most of gnome's actual users are pretty sophisticated with computers (as opposed to hypothetical beginners who have yet to materialize) and Epiphany, for that kind of user, is a stripped down over simplified piece of crap (not trying to flame, but seriously that is what many people think of it).

You yourself engage in this suble warfare to prop up Epiphany dispite its limited scope when you say that Epiphany is capable of "a whole lot more". That is just utter crap. It has never been the intention of Epiphany developers to offer "more" at all. What, can Epiphany offer that is "more"? Ultimately Firefox will use gnome file dialogs, gnome print dialogs, gnome helper apps, gnome icons, etc. Right now, firefox offers *way* "more" than epiphany, and it is *more* intuitive and clean to use than Epiphany. (My mother would freak out if files she clicked on to download just downloaded without any interaction with her to some location she did not know and the only reason she knew anything happened at all was because a little transfer dialog appeared for a second and if the file was too small disappeared again before she even had a chance to read it). Epiphany is riddled with crap like that that is supposed to be somehow improving usefulness via strict simplicity when in some cases removing features and interaction actually makes the user experience bewildering and frustrating. The integration is the only thing Epihpany has over Firefox and while I agree that is important it definitely takes a back seat to core application functionality, an area in which Epiphany gets crushed by Firefox. And, the integration is slowly coming in Firefox. When it is done, Epiphany's userbase will diminish to zero.

The whole gnome community was fooled by Epiphany developers (zealots) into believing that Epiphany was going to offer "more" (remember the cool screenshots that were released when Epiphany was still sort of a secret, everyone got excited because it was going to be more, different). Galeon devlopment was gutted because of that fork. Epiphany never became more at all. It is entirely a subset of Firefox and even IE functionality. Epiphany was never more in any way. Well everyone learned their lesson and is using Firefox now.

The reason people get negative about Epiphany is because now we all know that "more" really means your own religious and extreme interpretation of the "keep it simple" doctrine that everyone except Epiphany is becoming more moderate on. Epiphany removed every useful feature any browser ever had. The downloader, the address bar, these things in Epiphany are a joke to normal users.

Look, if you want that kind of browser, I'm happy for you and Epiphany developers. Great. Do whatever you want. But don't try and sell your Epiphany is "more" crap around here. I'm not buying and based on the fact that 95% of gnome users and distros have switched to Firefox, no one else is buying it either.

That is the worst attempt at "not trying to flame" I have ever seen. Are You actually a KDE troll?

Yeah, KDE woot!

Between my first post and now I went out with friends and got drunk. From my new drunk perspective this whole thread is amazingly amusing on many levels.

I won't go into detail here, but suffice to say that I agree with pretty much everything you just said. As Epiphany matures it sheds features like a dog sheds hair in the summer. By the time it hits 2.0 you'll have a renderer with a back button and that will be your browser. The whole reason I dumped epiphany was the fact that it didn't meet many of my basic needs. Epi developers will try to pass this off as "not bothering me with all kinds of confusing menu clutter." In response I offer an analogy: if I removed all furniture, appliances, and decor from my house, wouldn't that alleviate my confusing material clutter? Ahhhh...sweet simplicity....

Now I love the fact that Epi is GTK and HIG-compliant...that does make a difference. Firefox isn't quite the same as my other Gnome apps. However, GTK and HIG compliance aren't enough to convince me to hamstring my browser. Until Epiphany starts easing up on this minimalism philosophy and adding something useful, it's Firefox for me, and it would seem for the rest of the world as well.

hostility toward the Epiphany project because the spin and marketing job that actually does try to peddle Epiphany as the browser for everyone in gnome and that it is somehow better than Firefox or galeon.

Epiphany spin and marketing? It actually could use some advertising, but your insinuation that there's some sort of conspiracy against Firefox or Galeon going on can be easily refuted with facts. Just search the discussions in the GNOME mailinglist archives.

not trying to flame

Then don't!

but seriously that is what many people think of it

Many people think Linux is hard to use. So? Being misinformed is not an argument for anything.

Right now, firefox offers *way* "more" than epiphany, and it is *more* intuitive and clean to use than Epiphany.

That's a totally unsubstantiated claim. Epiphany already does *way more* than Firefox when it comes to GNOME integration (look up the previous footnotes article on firefox themes for a point by point analysis).

if files she clicked on to download just downloaded without any interaction with her

More misinformation. Epiphany will open a downloaded file automatically if there's an application registered to handle the mime type. Otherwise it will offer multiple download options.

And, the integration is slowly coming in Firefox. When it is done, Epiphany's userbase will diminish to zero.

Even if Ff would have equally good GNOME integration (which isn't going to happen), Epiphany has the advantage of being open to real innovations like the topical bookmarks system. Ff is little more than a new packaging around 1996 ideas.

The whole gnome community was fooled by Epiphany developers (zealots) into believing that Epiphany was going to offer "more" (remember the cool screenshots that were released when Epiphany was still sort of a secret, everyone got excited because it was going to be more, different). Galeon devlopment was gutted because of that fork.

Checking the facts will disprove your revisionist version of history. Epiphany never was "sort of a secret", and Galeon development is still going strong. Sorry, but who's the zealot here?

I'm sorry I'm spending precious time replying to a sideline critic like you. How's the GoneME project progressing, by the way?

I know nothing about gnomeME.

Epiphany for the first couple months after the galeon fork didn't have a web site or any releases at all. "secret" might be the wrong word but it was kept pretty under wraps. Either way, I wasn't trying to say anything there except recall the fact that for a long time all people had were screenshots and a few descriptions of UI innovations like the search short cuts in the address drop down and the bookmarks. All my point was, was that people were *excited* about epiphany at that point. People bought, big time, into the idea that epiphany was going to have new and exciting ui metaphors that were going to make things easier, more intuitive, and more powerful for everyone.

And, yes I do believe there is a conspiracy against galeon and firefox. It is much more tame now but for a long time there was a barrage of *propaganda* about how great Epiphany was and political moves to solidify its status as the default gnome browser. At the same time there were active attacks on galeon and exaggerations about how it was too confusing or cluttered. Galeon2 ended up being a very nice, easy to use, and moderate browser in terms of features. People were everywhere saying how galeon was a messy cludge and how Epiphany was so clean and intuitive. By conspiracy I don't mean secret agents spying and planting misinformation. By conspiracy I do mean that there was a concerted group effort by Epiphany people to attack and undermine the use of other browsers without regard for the interests of gnome users and/or the reality of the difference between the browsers.

Topical bookmarks system? Ooooh. Wow. First of all, topical bookmarks are not an innovation. Epiphany didn't make that stuff up. The reality is that such options are and have been known to browser developers and other developers but they chose not to use that metaphor because it largely sucks (sort of like OO file browsing which dissappeared in both MacOSX and Win). I'm sure that some people like it or that some people work better with that metaphor but *most* people don't like it (in either nautilus or epiphany) and the shitty thing about both changes is that both were shoved down users thoats with this crap about it being innovative and advanced when in reality both were just rip offs of previous ideas that had been rejected by other big players.

Name another "innovation" epiphany has over firefox. Try one that anyone actually gives a crap about this time. Or at least try one that more than 30% of the gnome community actually likes. Bookmarks was a bad example.

There is still development in galeon but it is glacial compared to the development pace before the Epiphany fork. The difference is at least 10x. If you think otherwise you were not paying attention during the first year of galeon development and don't know what you are talking about (or you are just lying to support your position).

My comments about the downloader are not misinformation. The "auto download to download folder" existed until recent versions. I just downloaded it and tried it and it does now ask you if you want to save or open the file. Applause for Epiphany developers. They reversed a retarded ui decision. Good job.

There is nothing revisionist about my version of events. You clearly were not involved from the beginning or if you were it is you who is making up history. Anyways, the facts don't lie. Everyone gave Epiphany a chance. Everyone is now using Firefox (yes, there have been a variety of polls on this. In gnome: #1 Firefox, #2 Galeon, #3 Epiphany)

I can appreciate that it must hurt when others don't agree with what you think is a really good idea. I get a little hurt when people don't like a movie or a book that I really like too. However, being mature means that you accept that others feel differently than you instead of relentlessly trying to attack their preference (for Firefox and galeon) and justifying your prefernce and/or trying to force them into your preference by making Epiphany the default gnome browser and by doing dirty things like filling my apps menu with crap like "Web Browser" and any time anyone expresses an interest in greater Firefox integration into gnome just telling them they should use Epiphany instead because it is "more" when in reality it is so much less. You might like "less". I and many other's do not. Don't try to tell us it is "more". Ok? that was basically my point, seasoned with a little hostility from hearing it so much.

Thanks all for participating in browser world war III.
I just want to round up with that I really like epiphany and
its book mark system.
Over and out.

The code for that is already done but isn't in the 1.0 branch... its done and patchable however and even may be a compile time option for 1.0 I believe (default off because of the number of people who hate the new filechooser's lack of input field)
If gnome would just add the text field back to the file choose I'm sure adaption would be much wider...

WTF is so hard about hitting ctrl+l? I hated the new chooser at first because of lack of input field, but then they said they'd have the ctrl+l shortcut and I just shut up and waited to see. And not that I've seen, I think it's great.

In fact, I find the new GNOME file selector to be the easiest file selector to use out of all current major desktops.

...the worst decision Gnome devs have ever made. When the people designing the chooser (which really is great, btw...it takes about 5 minutes to display /usr/bin, but otherwise I really do find it to be slick) first cut out the text input field, there was a MASSIVE outcry from the community. People BEGGED to have the input field left in. I don't know very many at all who were in favour of this Ctrl+L idea except the few designing and implementing it.

Just goes to show you whose opinion really counts. It ain't the users.

this seems to be open source way: scratch YOUR itch :)

"aunt tillie" would never even think about a thing called "text field" in file selector...

aunt tille doesn't use Gnome

and she is constantly confused by OOo fileselector.

thank god i could replace firefox for epiphany in her computer: no problems at all.

The point is that GNOME is trying to create an environment that our dear old aunt, among others, actually could use...

That's nice, but in the meanwhile, gnome has real users on real linux systems that really have to deal with nastiness like the whole /usr tree regularly, and would like to see a place to type directory names in a fileselector box.

I'm using GTK 2.5.4 and when i type '/' the text field auto appears (no ctr-l needed).
Is this what you need ?

-SF-

Damn! I hadn't even noticed that (only got gtk-2.5.x yesterday). That's really nice.

http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=62749

Strange things are happening with that link. When I mouseover it gets bold and underlined and blue, but it's not a hyperlink (ie clicking on it does nothing). Problems with the new Drupal setup, perhaps?

Using Firefox 1.0PR, WinXP.

Same thing happens with firefox on linux. Must be a drupal thing.

I've got exactly the same problem (same browser- and os-version).
Doens't hurt a lot with the plain-text links plugin ...