Hi Rick,
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 06:38:27PM -0700, Rick Spencer wrote:
> Back at UDS for 11.04 in Orlando, Mark set the goal of using Unity by
> default on the Ubutu desktop. Given the current course of development,
> it appears that we are going to achieve this goal, and Unity will stay
> the def
2011/4/8 Timo Jyrinki :
> There are a lot of bugs and lack of features (and many have been fixed
> already as well) and the performance is quite bad in parts, but those
> are not as serious as a) crashers and potentially b) accessibility and
> lack of any help.
Just reflecting on the more recent p
On 04/08/2011 01:27 AM, Micah Gersten wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 05:21 PM, Luke Yelavich wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:36:01AM EST, Micah Gersten wrote:
>>> Since now both Firefox and Chromium have committed to rapid release
>>> schedules, I think it's time to reevaluate the default browser in
>
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 10:36 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
> Since now both Firefox and Chromium have committed to rapid release
> schedules, I think it's time to reevaluate the default browser in
> Ubuntu. I am concerned that some of these upgrades might break system
> integration at some point. Wh
>> Please note, I was suggesting not having Firefox or Chromium as the
>> default, but a webkit based browser with a normal release cycle like
>> Epiphany (which uses webkitgtk :)).
Hey all,
Well there are two ways you can look at this.
1. Recognized brands like Chrome and Firefox which most peo
Am 09.04.2011 06:43, schrieb Sean McNamara:
> ...
> I have much respect for the Unity developers for contributing to FOSS,
> and I think that it has genuine utility in the netbook form factor. I
> just don't think it's ready for the general purpose desktop. My wish
> is for the Ubuntu Netbook Remix
Oops -- I meant to send this to the whole list, not just to Timo!
Sorry for the double mail, Timo!
Sean
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Sean McNamara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Timo Jyrinki wrote:
>> 2011/4/8 Timo Jyrinki :
>>> There are a lot of bugs and lack of feature
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Martin Owens wrote:
> But what is available isn't classic ubuntu gnome... at least not in
> testing so far:
Seb128 has fixed this, the Classic GNOME in Natty as of yesterdayish
is now what you'd think "Classic" should be.
For people who prefer classic they'll get
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Sean McNamara wrote:
> As a long time Gnome2 user (and prior to that Windows), I agree that
> not having the Windows-style "taskbar" is rather jarring for someone
> used to having it. Changing between windows in Unity is a mystery, and
> if you are running more tha
Hi,
I will reply to this thread properly in a few days, but I wanted to
reply to this particular post now.
On Sat, 2011-04-09 at 14:23 +0100, Shane Fagan wrote:
> Firefox I don't think ever fit in because of XUL.
I'd like to know why you think Firefox won't ever fit in because of XUL?
After all
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Jorge O. Castro wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Sean McNamara wrote:
>> As a long time Gnome2 user (and prior to that Windows), I agree that
>> not having the Windows-style "taskbar" is rather jarring for someone
>> used to having it. Changing betwee
Hi Chris,
Maybe I was presuming a bit of things :)
>> Firefox I don't think ever fit in because of XUL.
>
> I'd like to know why you think Firefox won't ever fit in because of XUL?
> After all, it's just another toolkit (like QT is just another toolkit,
> or perhaps you think that QT wouldn't fit
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Micah Gersten wrote:
> Since now both Firefox and Chromium have committed to rapid release
> schedules, I think it's time to reevaluate the default browser in
> Ubuntu. I am concerned that some of these upgrades might break system
> integration at some point.
One
Sounds like Chromium meets the standards for that one. I'm assuming
that there'd be Ubuntu-ifed branding for it, similar to that of
Firefox (ubu-fox)? That's if it were to become standard.
On 2011-04-09, Dylan McCall wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Micah Gersten wrote:
>> Since now both
On 9 April 2011 15:55, Dylan McCall wrote:
> One nice thing with Chromium and Epiphany is they store passwords
> using the native keyring daemon. (Epiphany always has, Chromium
> recently has and it should be enabled by default at this point). That
> is, passwords are properly encrypted at no cost
15 matches
Mail list logo
