>On 30 June 2012 16:44, Adrian Mageanu <[email protected]> wrote > > Funny, this is the fourth time this week only when I am suggested both > online and off to use Chromium. I have it installed, but I'm still > resisting to make it my default browser, mainly because of add-ons like > FEBE, AdBlock, Flashblock, NoScript, Firebug, other dev toolbars, and > the likes that make my life easier on Firefox, the equivalent functions > of which I couldn't find that easy on Chromium. And Chromium insistence > to authenticate with a google account whenever I want to go online > doesn't help it win me over. >
I'm myself mostly avoiding Chrome / Chromium now, not only becuase of not liking its functionality, but Googles marketing attitude towards it is making me want to go out of my way to even try it anymore. On windows now, every other program you install will ask you in the middle "Do you want to install Chrome?" and "Do you want to make it your default browser", and these are the "Default options" you get with those programs, and you have to opt-*out* of installing chrome and making it your default. If this sounds reasonable to anyone, may I suggest looking at the other installers that do the exact same thing with other products such as friendly "toolbars" and other such "sponsored products", which on their own are actually useless to me and are just nagware ( number of times I've found a toolbar thats been installed for me useful: 0 ) Its just crazy if you ask me, it'd be like going to the McDonalds Drive through, ordering a BigMac, and then they put you trading your station waggon in for a 2-seater smart car , at your expense, to the bottom of the order, and you have to say "Hey, I didn't ask for that" or they'll just go ahead and do it and charge you for the privilege. Yes, I know this is extreme hyperbole, but the amount of disgust at the behaviour is similar. People can talk all they want about how in their opinion the smart car is better because its more fuel economical, or better for the environment or something, but it doesn't make a damn difference to me, its still not what I want, doesn't hold 4 people, useless for hauling shopping, no towball, and only practical as a daily-driver and you'll burn the motor out if you try taking it from Chch to dunedin. ( thats if the fuel tank/battery gets you all that way. Nb. Theoretical smart car only, but you get my gist ) I'll have to check the source code out again and see if they've solved their woeful approach to opensource development yet. Last I looked at it ( a few years ago ) the code had a whole lot of bundled libraries source code with custom patching, which is not very Linux friendly at all ( its essentially as bad as statically linking the binary, but forcing everyone to do that, because they can't just share the system libraries in memory, they have to use their own copy of the libraries ). I just hope they're actually pushing changes to their custom patches back to upstream eventually, not just maintaining this limp-dick approach to opensource of "you can see the source right? problem? don't like it, fine, we'll keep maintaining our own incompatible unofficial fork that will eventually get so far out of date it will be different software". Sort of like what apple did with safari and khtml ... oh wait. Webkit , so par for the course right? </bitter cynicism> -- Kent perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.canterbury.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
