“Camino – the Gecko-based browser with a native Cocoa user interface – is considering switching its underlying rendering engine to WebKit. Developer Stuart Morgan announced the proposed change this week after Mozilla effectively put an end to the project that supported embedding Gecko into other software. While the team is still putting the finishing touches on a long overdue 2.1 update, which would finally bring rendering parity with Firefox 3.6, the small group is looking to recruit help to make the transition happen.”
Yeah, I dropped Camino when it fell behind. It really didn’t feel safe running older versions of the gecko renderer. I would consider using it again with webkit. Although, chrome works just fine for now and is available in every platform I use on a daily basis.
Its the old consistency within an environment vs consistency across platforms conundrum.
News on April Fools day…. how reliable?
It’s real:
http://caminobrowser.org/blog/
but what will I run on my imac g5? its 2.0Ghz and no up to date browser in sight! What is the point of the gecko rendering engine if nothing can be built around it?
Hang on, you have a iMac over 5 years old and you expect all and sundry to bend over backwards to support you and your out of date computer? colour me confused but why should they support you?
This is one such problem with relying on closed source operating systems and software.
As an end user you’re faced with two options; a half finished for ever promised to be completed and ready for the desktop operating system (Linux) or you can cough up the cash, live a life of ease and be ready to upgrade every 5 years (Windows/Mac OS X). Btw, there is nothing stopping said person from installing Ubuntu if they wanted any more than if their x86 ran Windows horribly and decided to go with some alternative operating system.
For me I work shitty hours and I am quite happy to pay the premium to have a system that works when I want it to – if you want to play around with your computer and fiddle endlessly to save a few dollars then all power to you – fill your boots. For me and many others we can’t be fucked being given endless promises and never delivering, or systems that are half finished and half baked with individual software projects that are pretty much abandon-ware.
You know, I usually up-vote comments by you because I not only find their content agreeable but usually also quite insightful.
But this one is a cheap shot way below your usual level of communications.
Most people use Linux (or *BSD, OpenSolaris, etc) because they like it and feel that their needs are best addresses by their operating system of choice.
Saving a few bucks might be a nice bonus on the side. Heck, most of these users will actually have paid for one of the other two options in order to get the hardware they wanted to work with.
Have you tried Linux in the past few years? Most people I install it for think it’s more complete and “fully baked” than Windows. I moved several family members from Windows to Linux due to malware, virus protection (yes they can be as bad as the malware). Their skill ranges from fairly advanced to almost computer illiterate but none of them ever touch the CLI. Support time has been cut to a small fraction and reliability significantly improved. All of them say they are very happy and none have asked to go back. Within 1-2 years they usually request I remove the windows partition (I usually install dual boot to ease the transition).
I’ve been using Linux on the desktop for 10 years now and run my networking/systems/web devel company through it. IMO Linux is and has been ready for the desktop for years, it’s just not for everyone. Some apps require Windows since they only exist on win or win/mac. For these home users Linux is not a great fit (corporations have more ways around a few win apps than most home users). For the average home user (browser, email, IM, social apps, music, office) Windows IMO is not a good fit for all the reasons I use Linux and more. I Can’t complain about the steady stream of cheap or free 2 year old windows computers that I rehab for friends and family because they got infected though so it all works out.
If you’re wondering why it prefer Linux to Windows on the desktop, the reasons are numerous but here are a few highlights:
1. All software loaded from one central, trusted authority instead of downloading from numerous vendors that I know nothing about.
2. Updates every 1.5 years that for the most part just work (MUCH better than any windows upgrade I’ve ever done). In addition there is no reason not to upgrade since cost is not a factor this also makes support much easier.
3. Moving data from one machine to another or from one HDD to another is trivial (just copy over /home).
4. No malware and a proper security implementation. Windows is still trying to get down the feel of proper user with sudo privileges but their getting closer.
5. No playing around with crappy activation and tracking of licenses for each and every program I install (yes since I work in IT everything is legit, this is WORLDS easier to do on a Linux system).
6. Power! Plain and simple I do a lot on my laptop (usually have 30+ instances of things open across 6 virtual desktops). I’ve never come close to doing things like this on Windows without it bogging down significantly. I should say thought that Vista always felt bogged to me most of the time and I haven’t used win7. Additionally, I use the CLI to accomplish a lot of things not possible / easily doable on Windows. The average users doesn’t need this most of the time but they do slowly start using more and more power when it is there for the taking making them more efficient and capable.
I hope this gives you an idea why some of us think Linux is better for most home users. Add to that the fact that it saves a lot of money over the life of the machine (no license to buy, free to upgrade until the hardware is insufficient, considerable savings on support costs) on top of the things listed above. Who knows maybe you’ll give a recent distro a spin and know more about it.
I try Linux every year.
I recently tried Arch and would definitely use it on the server over Debian or Fedora. I’d describe it as an ideal midpoint between FreeBSD and Slackware. But would I use it on the desktop? No. Would I leave it on a relative’s desktop? God no.
Linux on the desktop is not fail-safe or upgrade-safe. There is not a single distro that could have been trusted for a 4 year period. They all break something eventually. You can leave a user with a frozen system but then their software will become dated. The only Linux you should be leaving with a relative is Android.
Well I’ve done just that and had very little problems. I install Ubuntu on their machines and suggest they check with me before doing distro upgrades (to the next version) and I did make sure I did the upgrade when X11 changed to xorg. Other than that they do the updates all the time and one or two apps have had a problem 3-4x total (for all users totalling about 15 years total usage). All problems but one were fixable via phone and the other was a problem for a total of one day. Not sure what you’re doing but it seems to just work for my users. I’d also care to point out this is a lower problem rate than have windows updates running automatically (and that does just the OS).
What distro are you using and how serious were the problems (app not working or OS unusable)? I’ve been supporting Linux (mostly servers but some desktop) for over 8 years and the last big problems I experienced were a bad server upgrade from Debian 4 -> 5 and the X11 -> Xorg trans on several distros. That’s a long time and a lot of upgrades to have only small issues with (which granted there are from time to time).
That just shows it isn’t upgrade safe. You can leave a user on a limited account in Windows and the system will silently upgrade itself in the background for years.
Ubuntu has a history of breaking common hardware with updates. That isn’t debatable.
Don’t insult me by suggesting that I am doing something wrong. It’s not my fault that you and others are in denial of the upgrade ‘n break problem.
Many users complain that upgrading Ubuntu breaks programs, breaks device drivers, causes conflicts etc.
How do we solve this problem forever? It would be nice if users could keep Ubuntu updated indefinitely without problems.
Before users upgrade, there are 2 well known tips to avoid problems: 1. Try the new Ubuntu release on a live CD/DVD or live USB to check the device drivers work properly. 2. Cleanly install the new Ubuntu – this is faster than upgrading and works more reliably, although /home folders have to be backed-up beforehand.
http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/26403/
Total BS. I’ve never seen XP or 7 break a working wireless card with an update or dump a user into a command prompt after breaking a video driver.
You do realize that a distro upgrade is like upgrading from XP to Vista or Vista to Win 7, right? Or do you recommend varied home users upgrade from vista to win7 themselves?
As for Windows working silently in the background for years you of course mean things like these:
http://swigartconsulting.blogs.com/tech_blender/2006/07/windows_upd…
http://blogs.computerworld.com/15581/microsoft_fails_its_customers_…
http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_vista-perf…
I’ve had far fewer problems on Ubuntu than Windows from normal upgrades (not distro-upgrade ones) so I would have to disagree with you on that.
Again here they are talking about a distro upgrade (similar to upgrading to the next version of Windows). I can see where this might confuse a predominantly windows user since there is no easy way to do the same thing in the Windows world (you need to buy a upgrade CD, and run it from CD or USB). If you’ve ever done an Ubuntu distro upgrade and a Windows version upgrade you would likely realize that the Ubuntu one is WORLDS better (faster, more consistent, less problems). I should also point out that point #2 is a suggestion and not a great one at that. It is, however, what MS recommends doing when upgrading versions of Windows.
You may want to look at some of the links above. Boot loops, BSODs, network breakage all have been results of normal auto updates. If you have never experienced these try being admin for a few small to medium businesses with Windows desktops. You’ll see updates that break things in this way, I guarantee it.
I see you want to try and make Ubuntu’s 6 month upgrade n break comparable to Windows system upgrades. Users on XP haven’t been forced to upgrade to another OS while Ubuntu users have been forced to choose between a system upgrade or dated software and hardware compatibility.
Ubuntu even broke wireless on the Dell Mini 9 which came with Ubuntu pre-installed:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1152063
I’ll give you the same challenge I have given Linux users before. Cite a distro that could have been trusted to update itself and Firefox, OpenOffice and Flash from 2008 without requiring the user to go to the command line.
Ubuntu 8.04 fails at this challenge in case you were wondering.
http://www.howtoforge.com/how-to-install-openoffice-3.0.0-on-ubuntu…
I don’t think you really understand the update process. Every release is supported for 18 months (this means security updates, bug fixes, etc). LTS releases are supported for 3 years. Most home users just update from LTS to LTS giving an 18month – 2yr time between upgrades. This seems to work quite well and gives very few problems. New users may start with a non-LTS if newer hardware support is needed but once they get to the next LTS I recommend they go LTS to LTS.
Yep, that happens when you specifically add the jaunty-proposed repository. This would NOT have affected any users that did not specifically add this “testing” repository. FYI: this sort of thing is what I was asking about earlier when I said “not sure what you’re doing”.
Well it seems you’re either reaching here or just haven’t used Ubuntu much. This link shows you how to install a newer version of open office (3.0) that was released 6 months after the 8.04 release. Most home users just used the 2.x release until the 3.0 release was rolled into the next LTS upgrade. That’s what I and all my users did and there were no problems.
As for the challenge I and almost all my users did just that without problem. There were some minor issues but again MUCH less than doing a Windows version upgrade. The one exception is the Xorg upgrade which I think was from 6.10 -> 8.04 IIRC. That did require some config editing or maybe just deleting the config. To be honest I don’t recall since it was a few years back now.
You seem very happy with Windows and I’m very happy running Linux. At first I was responding because I thought you’d actually had these problems and also to provide other potential users a different point of view. Now it seems rather clear to me that you have NOT experienced most of these problems so there’s nothing to fix here. Additionally, if potential users want to really see what Linux is like they can run from usb and try it. Enjoy your Windows system, I know I’ll keep working on my Linux ones,
Hmm, no. A distro upgrade is not similar to upgrading from XP to Vista. I’ve had XP, from SP1 to SP3 and all system updates applied and some driver updates and applications upgrades, since August 2003. No Linux distro could provide me with such a long string of updates or, as nt_jerkface said, the user has decided to trade stability for obsolescence. As much as Linux users love their system, and I can understand that, none of them can defend what you wrote without falling into some kind of hypocrisy.
If distro upgrades had been similar to an XP-to-Vista upgrade, the lay users running Ubuntu 7.04 would be able to **choose** to stay on 7.04 while using the same applications that 10.10 runs. I mean, except for IE9, I don’t know (granted, I don’t know much about anything) of any lay-user application that 7 runs that can’t run on XP. Can you say the same of the XP-era and 7-era distros? I doubt it.
Amen brother. That’s exactly why I don’t use Windows.
Well his/her machine obviously still serves its purpose…so what if it is five years old?
A 5 year old machine is out of date? So much for the Mac lasts longer bullshit, I suppose.
Funny. I have a Pentium 4 machine from 2002 serving as my media centre, running Windows 7. It does full HD without a hitch.
This “macs last longer” thing hasn’t applied to Apple laptops (at least 13″ MBPs) since the first Unibody releases, as far as I can tell
Don’t know about their desktop offering, though.
Edited 2011-04-02 11:59 UTC
Well, I own a first gen macbook 13″ (bought the day they were available). The screen broke, just because my dog pulled the audio cable and it fell to the ground. It has been my media centre since then, running 24/7 without any further issues.
When the first one broke (nov 2008), I got an unibody (the 13″ was not labeled pro yet). It is my main computer, and I’ve never had any problem with it…
My server is a 1999 vintage G3 running Tiger. Put in a SATA card while back, now has 4 1.5 TB drives (still have a 20G as a boot drive as it won’t boot off SATA). Also added gigabit ethernet card.
Its a server, so there’s no need for anything faster than a G3.
A 5 year old machine *IS* old. Does it still operate? sure but expecting developers to continue supporting a ever decreasing potential user base is just being ludicrous.
And there has been a architecture transition equal to that of the the PPC to x86 that occurred in the Mac world – really? nice to see you’re ignoring the context in which the whole matter is being discussed. Why consider the matter of a architecture change when you can fly off the handle whining about how I ‘don’t get it’.
If he wishes to continue to use it then all power to him but don’t expect software vendors to support him any more than than Adobe ceasing to provide PPC versions of their software simply because the demand isn’t there (or the demand is so weak it can’t justify the extra engineering expense).
I still haven’t seen a P4 fail.
Damn things run hot as hell but they just keep ticking.
Huh? I’m using Firefox 3.6 / 4 on such a system. Those are not up to date enough?
There is also Safari 5 and Opera 10.6. All of these are “up to date” browsers.
The Problem is, that a G5 is a PowerPC Processor, and Mozilla 4 and Opera (above 10.1) doesnt support PPCs, becuse new JS Engines have something like Assemblercode in it (I heard something like this)
So, Opera 10.5 is the newest Browser for G5 User… Except for TenFourFox, which is maybe a project for you (And for me, i am using a G4 )
LOL. You contradict yourself in your own post. Opera up to 10.6 supports PPC. TenFourFox is for everybody that wants Firefox 4 on PPC and that’s what you get. So you have a choice of at least 3 major modern browsers. And the problem is? Oh wait… nothing.
I’m not understanding either how come they aren’t running Safari latest on his PPC box. Hell, I’m running WebKit Nightly on my PPC PowerBook G4 15 right now.
What I don’t get is the new Javascript Engine for it, and WebGL for sure is not working.
I hate April Fools. I just don’t bother browsing.
That might be the case but this post has nothing to do with April Fools.
Camino was interesting because it used the Firefox rendering engine in a native UI?
So how is Camino supposed to be any better, let alone different from Safari? How about Chrome?
Furthermore, the UI on Mac Firefox 4 is actually OK.
So, the Mac has at least 2 well supported WebKit browsers: Safari and Chrome, and Firefox UI no longer sucks. Whats the point of Camino?
I’m a Camino user of 8 or 9 years. It’s been my primary browser that whole time. After hearing this news I decided to spend some time with some other browsers to identify an alternative that meets my needs.
What I found was this: Camino has just the right amount of minimalism for my needs. It doesn’t have any features (or almost) that I don’t use, but I don’t feel I’m lacking any features. Other browsers were either too minimalistic (to the point that I found dealing with bookmarks a hassle), or just bloated.
It’s sad that the Camino project has wained over the years, with more devs leaving than joining. But that’s the nature of open source projects: they depend on momentum. And Mozilla’s decision that Gecko belongs inside Firefox is almost like the final nail in the coffin. Ironically, Camino has been using Gecko longer than Firefox has.
Ramble over.
Another “win” for sensationalistic titling.