[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Default browser of FC3?

On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 13:19 +0200, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
> On 10/10/2004 03:35 AM, Ricardo Veguilla wrote:
> >>I mentioned some reasons earlier, but one may also ask the question, why 
> >>Epiphany? Why not Mozilla, Konquerer, or Firefox?
> > 
> > Well, since I'm interested in hearing what is wrong with epiphany,
> > asking why other browsers aren't the default is pretty much irrelevant.
> Please read the thread. Reasons for using Firefox have been given. I saw 
>   no reason repeating these reasons (but if you want me to I can do 
> that) instead I wanted to broaden the discussion by also asking the 
> question above. I, and others, have given reasons for using Firefox, so 
> the question, why Epiphany, is quite valid at this place of the discussion.

I read the thread. Are you reading my questions? I didn't ask anyone
"Why should Firefox be the default?", I use firefox regularly, I know
how good it is, and I know why it will be convenient to used it as
default browser. 

But what I asked was "Whats wrong with epiphany?" and when you extended
the dicussion to "Why not *insert my favorite browser here*?" you
changed the discussion. 

> >>I think the default should reflect the number of users of that 
> >>application. I.e. the most used browser should be the default, and I do 
> >>not think that Epiphany is the most used browser at the moment. 
> > 
> > Quite frankly I don't think the current number of users is a good reason
> > to choose the distribution's default browser.
> Why not? What should be used to chose the default application?
> > Based on this argument,
> > many people would never be exposed to new software, among other things.
> They will be interested if the choice is there and users of said 
> application is pushing people to test and use the application. It is all 
> up to marketing. If you like Epiphany, market it! If people like it, 
> they will use it. If they do not like it, they will not use it.
> > I'm obviously assuming that all the popular browser are available for
> > those who want to use them.
> Yes, the choice have to be there for those wanting to test different things.
> >>It is 
> >>used, I know, but not the most used. I do not think either that it will 
> >>be the most used, it is probably too minimalistic for most users. So why 
> >>Epiphany?
> > 
> > Its simple, minimal and tightly integrated to Gnome, thats exactly why
> > the Gnome project decided to use it as official browser and I think its
> > the same in the Red-Hat/Fedora case.
> Thanks for answering my question "Why Epiphany."
> First, I think the "tightly integrated to Gnome" is irrelevant as Fedora 
> is not a Gnome only distribution. 

Well if Fedora includes Gnome and Gnome is designed to be tightly
integrating, then it is relevant to Fedora. The same thing happens with
KDE. If KDE is designed to be flexible and customizable, then Fedora
shouldn't break that user experienced. 

> Gnome may be the default if you do not 
> make an active choice while installing Fedora, but making a truly Gnome 
> specific application the default for Fedora entirely, is in my thinking 
> wrong. 


> Why not use a Kde specific application as the default? Your 
> proposal to use different "defaults" in different environments, 
> mentioned in another part of this thread, is a good one, although I do 
> not see any reason for making Epiphany default, even in Gnome. It should 
> be there as an option for users wanting minimalism, but it is in my 
> opinion not suited as a default.

Well, as a GNOME user, I expect consistency in my desktop experience,
epiphany is designed for that, firefox is not.  

> Regarding minimal that may, or may not be, a good thing. The bad thing 
> is that this lead to less choice, which will make it hard to use.

Minimal = simpler to use.  Less choice has nothing to do with the
software usability.
>  Choice is not a bad thing, choice is a good thing. Minimalism is important in 
> critical applications though, but a browser is not a critical application...

I agree that choice is good, but both, the importance of minimalism, and
which applications are critical or not, are matters of opinion. 

My opinion? keep it simple....

> Simple, well it might be, but all browsers are rather simple to use, so 
> I can not see that is a special issue for Epiphany. Firefox is also 
> simple to use, as an example.
> >>At the moment I think the most used browser in the Fedora community is 
> >>Mozilla, based on it being the "default" now, and the spread use it has 
> >>both in Linux, and other operating systems. As the Mozilla team now seem 
> >>to push Firefox, I would seem logical for Fedora to follow this and set 
> >>Firefox as the default.
> > 
> > Mozilla is the most popular because it was the default.
> > 
> > Epiphany is not popular because its not the default... so...
> > Epiphany should not be the default because its not popular.
> A high popularity means a huge user base. A huge user base means a lot 
> of people to ask questions if one gets lost. I am not saying that 
> Epiphany should not be the default because it's not popular, I am saying 
> Mozilla/Firefox should be used due the huge user base. If Epiphany would 
> rise to the heavens and get a huge user base, by all means, make it the 
>   default. But let it get a huge user base and popularity before making 
> it the default, so that new users have people to ask for help if they 
> get stuck.
> > Firefox should be the default because, even though its not the most
> > popular (the ideal element of the default browser, in your opinion), its
> > the offspring of Mozilla which is the most popular.
> If Firefox was not there, Mozilla would be the obvious choice. But as 
> the Mozilla team is pushing Firefox as the browser, Fedora would follow 
> this. Clear enough?
> > If I understood your position correctly, your arguments against epiphany
> > (which was what I asked for in my original email) are:
> >  
> > a) its minimalistic (which seems to be the "main" feature of epiphany)
> > b) its not the most popular browser at this moment
> It has in some areas driven the minimalistic trend too far, making it 
> hard to use sometimes. 

for example?

> Epiphany is, in my point of view, a niche 
> application for those that want and like minimalistic applications. It 
> is not suited as a default.

I simply disagree.

> The popularity of the browser is, perhaps, the most important part 
> though. New users will need help, we should then have defaults that 
> reflect the user base. A huge user base means that a newbie easier will 
> get help from someone.

I disagree again, popularity is important for deciding what to include,
but its meaningless for the "default application" issue. Defaults are
for newbies. An experienced user will use his preferred application, no
matter what the default is.  

An new user shouldn't need help using the browser... thats the whole
point of using epiphany (or any simple browser). 

> > If you (and I, and everyone else that likes something different) can
> > change the default browser to something else, whats the point of asking
> > a user who may not know what firefox, epiphany,galeon or mozilla, to
> > chose a browser?
> Choice! You give the user the choice to chose a default. If he/she do 
> not like this choice, he/she may change it with the preferred 
> application, and/or file types and programs dialog box. Most new users 
> come from the Microsoft windows world, and know, and can use, both 
> Mozilla and Firefox. Why should we steer them to Epiphany?

> > I think that this boils down to the question: Who is the target user for
> > that default app/setting/etc? In my experience default values are for
> > newbies... experienced user usually changed the defaults to whatever
> > they like (except when the default "Just Work" ;).  
> Yes, experienced user may, and will, change defaults. So looking from 
> the newbies point of view. What is best for a newbie, a browser that is 
> used by a lot of users, even in Microsoft Windows, where most newbies 
> come from, or a browser with a small user base, with few people to get 
> help from? (And I want to repeat, I do not think that this user base 
> will rise especially higher even by making Epiphany the default browser 
> in Gnome, and/or the whole Fedora.)

Just for the record, epiphany is Gnome default browser since Gnome 2.4
was released a year ago. 

> For me the choice is quite obvious, one should use the browser that has 
> a huge user base. Why? Because the confused newbie then will have a lot 
> of experienced users to ask questions to.

Like I said before, I don't think popularity is important is choosing
the default browser, and I don't think that a new user needs "a browser
that is used by a lot of users". 

Ricardo Veguilla <veguilla hpcf upr edu>

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]