Terminal Velocity
Well-Known Member
I have no complaints from FF, I'm just curious, why it is preinstalled in so many distributions? There are other open source browsers like Brave for example, why we don't see Brave preinstalled?
Why so many Linux distributions support FireFox?
- Thread starter Terminal Velocity
- Start date
Firefox has been around from almost the Beginning of Linux, and it was open source. Something not every browser is.
And it works pretty well with linux. This page may be of help in understanding it.
And it works pretty well with linux. This page may be of help in understanding it.
A Look Back at the History of Firefox
Mozilla Firefox is one of the leading open source projects in the world. Read about the history of Firefox, how it came into existence and ruled the world wide web.itsfoss.com
OP
Terminal Velocity
Well-Known Member
You are on topic
Once upon a time, they used a pseudonym of mine in an advertisement in the NYT. If you donated X-amount of dollars to Mozilla, they included your name in a 2 page advertisement. I was on that list.
I also used to pay for Opera, back in the day.
Anyhow, Firefox was new and awesome. I still appreciate Mozilla, but Firefox is my 'third' browser. (I use different browsers for different things.) Firefox has its own role and it's pretty slight with maybe a dozen open tabs.
I didn't stop donating, but I stopped donating as much. The reason I continue to donate is because I love (not ironically) their email client. Thunderbird is the closest thing to old school OutlookExpress (not Outlook) I can find and that is awesome. The loss of Thunderbird would be a problem for me, so I continue to give my monthly dues to Mozilla.
And, yes, I'm one of those folks that puts their money where their mouth is. I donate to a number of projects on a regular basis. I could probably write all these donations off, but they don't equate enough to matter at the end of the day.
So, I technically keep supporting Mozilla. I do so for Thunderbird reasons, however.
As for the vast support Linux distros give Firefox, that's a good thing. While it's not a high percentage, Firefox still accounts for a bunch of browser use. Being the default in Linux is probably a good thing, as it helps that along. Though, we're less like Windows users and are more comfortable changing our default browser...
Without those default installs, Firefox would become more obscure. Again, it's not much, but Google needs some competition in the sphere. We don't want Google to have a total monopoly, though that's not enough incentive to switch my default browsers around.
I also used to pay for Opera, back in the day.
Anyhow, Firefox was new and awesome. I still appreciate Mozilla, but Firefox is my 'third' browser. (I use different browsers for different things.) Firefox has its own role and it's pretty slight with maybe a dozen open tabs.
I didn't stop donating, but I stopped donating as much. The reason I continue to donate is because I love (not ironically) their email client. Thunderbird is the closest thing to old school OutlookExpress (not Outlook) I can find and that is awesome. The loss of Thunderbird would be a problem for me, so I continue to give my monthly dues to Mozilla.
And, yes, I'm one of those folks that puts their money where their mouth is. I donate to a number of projects on a regular basis. I could probably write all these donations off, but they don't equate enough to matter at the end of the day.
So, I technically keep supporting Mozilla. I do so for Thunderbird reasons, however.
As for the vast support Linux distros give Firefox, that's a good thing. While it's not a high percentage, Firefox still accounts for a bunch of browser use. Being the default in Linux is probably a good thing, as it helps that along. Though, we're less like Windows users and are more comfortable changing our default browser...
Without those default installs, Firefox would become more obscure. Again, it's not much, but Google needs some competition in the sphere. We don't want Google to have a total monopoly, though that's not enough incentive to switch my default browsers around.
Not to mention it allows you to do whatever you want to it, unlike all other browsers. You can customize it in any way you want. This what my Firefox looks like after nearly 20 years of customizations. You'd never guess what the browser is, especially if I decided to change the icon on the panel.
No other browser allows you to change its face this much.
Reading the link provided, it's clear firefox started in 2002, a good decade after linux hit the net. Wikipedia has an entry on the history as well. Before the firefox browser, there was Netscape from around the mid 1990s, but before both of them was lynx which is a text browser, and is still maintained.
Firefox has such a huge selection of extensions and add-ons, and such a huge number of configurable variables in the about:config facility, it's a hacker's delight since one can alter it in innumerable ways. I guess that both it's free and open source aspect, and it's capacity to accommodate a very wide range of needs and interests have made it so attractive to such a great number of linux distros.
Me, I run so many different 'portable' browsers - specially built for Puppy, though with a few tweaks (mainly permission changes, I'd guess) they'd probably run in any distro - that I don't really have a "default" browser as such. I just fire up whatever takes my fancy for the day..!!
As for FF being more configurable, mmm.....I dunno so much. Chromium and its 'clones' are just as 'hackable'; it's all down to the vast array of available '--switches' (these all go on the wrapper-script's 'Exec' line) as listed here by Peter Beverloo:-
https://peter.sh/experiments/chromium-command-line-switches/
As so often, it comes down to how much time & effort the individual user wants to spend on the "issue".
Mike.
As for FF being more configurable, mmm.....I dunno so much. Chromium and its 'clones' are just as 'hackable'; it's all down to the vast array of available '--switches' (these all go on the wrapper-script's 'Exec' line) as listed here by Peter Beverloo:-
https://peter.sh/experiments/chromium-command-line-switches/
As so often, it comes down to how much time & effort the individual user wants to spend on the "issue".
Mike.
Last edited:
I think that's worthwhile to bring up: even though chrome doesn't come pre-installed, i have never had an issue installing it. I think the main thing is that firefox is more "ideologically" consistent with the FOSS community. Google clearly isn't trustworthy in terms of how they manage the information you give them, as their whole business model is based on the information they collect from both their search engine and browser.Me, I run so many different 'portable' browsers - specially built for Puppy, though with a few tweaks (mainly permission changes, I'd guess) they'd probably run in any distro - that I don't really have a "default" browser as such. I just fire up whatever takes my fancy for the day..!!
As for FF being more configurable, mmm.....I dunno so much. Chromium and its 'clones' are just as 'hackable; it's all down to the vast array of available '--switches' (these all go on the wrapper-script's 'Exec' line) as listed here by Peter Beverloo:-
https://peter.sh/experiments/chromium-command-line-switches/
As so often, it comes down to how much time & effort the individual user wants to spend on the"issue".
Mike.
OP
Terminal Velocity
Well-Known Member
Preinstalled Chrome in Linux I'm sure it will send ripples in communities around the world
If that ever happened to my distro I'd drop it in a heartbeat.
This was more true in the past; not so much today.
Open Source Ideology aside, I think I am going to give up my apostasy and start using Firefox instead of the Chrome I've preferred over several years and Ubuntu systems. The reason is technical. On a new Lenovo laptop computer, with preinstalled Ubuntu, I've tried installing Chrome (sudo apt install google-chrome-stable) and found it to crash my system whenever left running for any length of time. It may be that leaving it open with too many browser tabs is part of the problem. But I can't seem to find a true smoking gun in any log file I look at.
Does anyone hear know of any good source of information on the problem of Chrome crashing on Ubuntu? I can google a few hits but they don't seem well-informed. Or provide a log to check so I can nail this down?
Whatever, if Firefox doesn't have this problem, I'm willing to switch.
Does anyone hear know of any good source of information on the problem of Chrome crashing on Ubuntu? I can google a few hits but they don't seem well-informed. Or provide a log to check so I can nail this down?
Whatever, if Firefox doesn't have this problem, I'm willing to switch.
Last edited:
Brickwizard
Well-Known Member
@stevecoh1
Welcome to the forums
the thread you have just posted in is nearly a year old, the debate died,
Just to add I have been using FF for probably over 20 years and not had a problem, [the ESR version is a little less complient due to the restrictions placed in it]
If you wish you can start a new thread in General question
NOTE TO OTHER MEMBERS OLD THREAD PLEASE DO NOT REPLY
Welcome to the forums
the thread you have just posted in is nearly a year old, the debate died,
Just to add I have been using FF for probably over 20 years and not had a problem, [the ESR version is a little less complient due to the restrictions placed in it]
If you wish you can start a new thread in General question
NOTE TO OTHER MEMBERS OLD THREAD PLEASE DO NOT REPLY
Have you tried installing Chromium, instead? It's a base Google Chrome and Edge are build on.
I just avoid google when possible. But I have noticed that in a lot of Linux discussions, many times people say they want a small, efficient, light-weight distro. (I don't know why). But then they run the heaviest browser out there.
Running Firefox, Edge and Chrome at the same time. All with the same single web page open. Chrome spawns more processes than firefox or MS edge. As a rule Chrome uses more resources than Edge or Firefox. If you open top, it sometimes looks like Chrome is the lowest, and it is... (per process) however if you add all the processes up, it's usually the heaviest.
(top -p PID1,PID2,PID2, etc...)
Chrome uses slightly more CPU (about 5-7%) Firefox can use use slightly more RAM. (about 1 or 2%) and Edge surprisingly uses the fewest resources. Then there's network resources. If you run tcpdump, you will see that Chrome makes more background connections than the other two. All of them "call home" (even the supposedly "private" firefox). More chrome calls more homes more often. Firefox opened 12 network connections, Edge opened 20, and Chrome 27 (more than twice as many as firefox).
Running Firefox, Edge and Chrome at the same time. All with the same single web page open. Chrome spawns more processes than firefox or MS edge. As a rule Chrome uses more resources than Edge or Firefox. If you open top, it sometimes looks like Chrome is the lowest, and it is... (per process) however if you add all the processes up, it's usually the heaviest.
(top -p PID1,PID2,PID2, etc...)
Chrome uses slightly more CPU (about 5-7%) Firefox can use use slightly more RAM. (about 1 or 2%) and Edge surprisingly uses the fewest resources. Then there's network resources. If you run tcpdump, you will see that Chrome makes more background connections than the other two. All of them "call home" (even the supposedly "private" firefox). More chrome calls more homes more often. Firefox opened 12 network connections, Edge opened 20, and Chrome 27 (more than twice as many as firefox).
Attachments
Chrome can now suspend inactive tabs automatically. I prefer an extension called 'Auto Tab Discard'.
That said, you can also go into the settings and disable 'Hardware Acceleration'. You'll then need to restart your browser. This is known to fix seemingly random crashes. It doesn't work properly anyhow, so you're not missing out on anything by disabling it.
Condobloke
Well-Known Member
I recently moved from brave browser (chrome based) back to Firefox and am quite happy with the outcome.
I had found both brave and chromium exhibiting some 'weirdness', ....I can do without unexplained happenings....hence the shift.
FF user ever since I started to use a internet. Late W95 days. Buddy I knew helped me out a lot those days and suggested FF over whatever was installed. So I grew up with it basically.
Tried all the others in modern times but I never got used to Chromiums' engine or something. Something puts me off.
The I discovered Linux (Ubuntu Bionic Beaver) and tried so many distros and they ALL came with FF standard. They STILL do.
FF and Linux is a package deal as far as I'm concerned.
Tried all the others in modern times but I never got used to Chromiums' engine or something. Something puts me off.
The I discovered Linux (Ubuntu Bionic Beaver) and tried so many distros and they ALL came with FF standard. They STILL do.
FF and Linux is a package deal as far as I'm concerned.
Similar threads
